hcloud_list_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds no behavioral context whatsoever — nothing about pagination behaviour of limit, result ordering, or whether the listing is domain-scoped.

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?

Three words, front-loaded, zero waste. However, the terseness edges into under-specification rather than purposeful brevity, keeping it just below the top mark.

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 simple one-parameter read-only lister with no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate to call the tool. It is missing any note on scope (which domain/account's users) or what a returned user record contains, which would matter for an IAM listing.

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 is a single optional parameter (limit) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds nothing beyond it, which is acceptable but minimal; 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?

"List IAM users" states a specific verb (list) and a specific resource (IAM users), which is enough to distinguish it from siblings like hcloud_list_groups, hcloud_list_policies, and hcloud_show_user. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, so it lands at a clear-but-undifferentiated 4.

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 when to pick hcloud_list_users versus hcloud_show_user or hcloud_list_user_policies, and no prerequisites (e.g. domain/tenant scope) for listing IAM users. It only implies usage through the verb itself.

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