query-users

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action without detailing return format, auth requirements, pagination behavior, or side effects beyond the read-only implication of 'query'.

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 focused phrase with no filler words, front-loading the verb and resource. It is appropriately size for the information it conveys.

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?

The description is minimal and does not mention return type or pagination, though the schema's parameter descriptions and the query nature partially cover these. Without annotations or output schema, it lacks behavioral and return-value context, leaving some gaps for a filtering tool.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage of parameters with descriptions (skip, limit, order, where). The description adds no extra semantics beyond the generic 'with filters', so it does not exceed the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'query' and identifies the resource as 'user accounts', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-current-user or query-objects. The scope is also clear: filtering user accounts.

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 explicit usage guidance is provided; no alternative tools or exclusions are mentioned. The phrase 'with filters' implies a use case, but there is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, making guidance merely implied.

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