n8n: List users

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, yet the description presents this as a plain read ("List all users"). That is a direct conflict in the safety profile an agent uses to decide whether a call can mutate state. The description also says nothing about permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or the meaning of "UNIFIED".

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded and free of padding, so nothing is bloated. However the brevity comes at the cost of substance, and the bracketed "[UNIFIED]" marker occupies prime real estate without being defined anywhere.

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?

A four-parameter tool with a required site argument, pagination parameters, no output schema, and annotations that signal destructive behavior needs far more than a one-line summary. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly — required argument, paging, return shape, or the true risk profile — is present.

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% for all four parameters, so the description carries the full burden and fails: it explains neither limit, cursor (pagination contract), nor include_role. Worse, it asserts "All parameters are OPTIONAL" while the schema marks site as required, actively misleading the agent about how to form a valid call.

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 a specific verb and resource ("List all users in the n8n instance"), so an agent can tell this reads users from n8n rather than from another system. It offers no differentiation from siblings such as n8n_create_user, n8n_delete_user, n8n_change_user_role, or the other *_list_users tools, and the unexplained "[UNIFIED]" tag adds no discriminating information.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: no mention of pagination scenarios, no contrast with n8n_add_project_users or n8n_change_user_role, and no note about when listing would be preferable to searching. The only usage-adjacent sentence, "All parameters are OPTIONAL", is guidance, but it is wrong.

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