list-users

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

With no annotations provided, the description relies on the verb 'list' to imply read-only behavior. It adds purpose but does not disclose potential complexities like authentication, rate limits, or whether all user fields are returned. This is a moderate gap for a simple list tool.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds relevant use-case context. No unnecessary details.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It conveys the purpose and the typical output (user IDs, names, emails), making the tool understandable and sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output is useful for mapping user IDs to names and emails, which provides context beyond the empty 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 clearly states the tool lists all Gong users in the account, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list-calls and get-user by focusing on users and the 'all' scope.

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?

It provides a clear use case ('mapping user IDs to names and emails') which implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when needing a single user's details.

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