motion_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Manage users and get current user information,' which is misleading because the schema only supports list and current operations, not general management (create/update/delete). No disclosure of authorization, rate limits, or side effects.

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 very concise (7 words) but lacks structure and detail. It does not effectively front-load key information, and the vague term 'manage' does not earn its place. A longer, more precise description would be more helpful.

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 tool has 4 parameters (with an enum), no output schema, and only a brief description, it is incomplete. The description does not explain the operations, parameter roles beyond schema, or return values, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 100%, so all parameters are defined in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters beyond what is already in the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Manage users and get current user information,' which indicates the tool deals with users, but 'manage' is vague and does not specify the operations (list, current) revealed in the schema. The sibling tools are for different entities, so domain clarity is adequate but not precise.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for user operations, but there is no explicit context, exclusion, or mention of alternatives.

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