List workspace users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the output contains user IDs, which is useful for downstream parameter reuse, but does not disclose additional behaviors such as pagination defaults or response structure beyond what the schema already implies.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It delivers the core purpose and key use case in an immediately scannable format.

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?

For a read-only list operation with 9 well-documented parameters and a clear title, the description is sufficient. It does not explicitly describe the full return payload, but the key fact ('with their ids') is present, and annotations plus schema cover the operational contract.

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 coverage is 100%: all 9 parameters have descriptive meanings (filters, pagination, workspace_id fallback, include_memberships). The description itself does not need to repeat parameter details and adds only the conceptual link to user_id, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 title 'List workspace users' provides a clear verb+resource, and the description adds the specific purpose of exposing user IDs for downstream tools. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clockify_find_user (specific lookup) and clockify_list_workspaces (workspace-level, not users).

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'needed whenever a tool asks for user_id.' This is actionable, context-rich guidance that tells the agent exactly where to go for user ID lookup, and by implication differentiates from other user-related tools.

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