redmineflux_core_list_users

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the admin API key requirement and parameter behaviors (status filter, pagination). However, it does not explicitly state the operation is read-only or describe side effects/error cases, though the output schema covers return format.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose followed by an Args block. Every element is informative with no redundancy, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the low complexity (3 simple parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers authentication, parameter semantics, and pagination behavior, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the schema provides no descriptions for parameters. The description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: status with enumerated values, limit with max, and offset for pagination. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'List users' with a clear verb and resource. It also specifies the prerequisite of an admin API key, making the tool's scope unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_projects or list_issues.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies when to use this tool (to list users) and provides a prerequisite (admin API key). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but given the tool's straightforward purpose and siblings, the context is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.