List Microsoft 365 Users

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that query parameters are optional (already visible in the schema) but does not mention pagination, default response size, or rate limits.

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?

A single, punchy sentence that front-loads the primary action and lists the parameters succinctly. Every word earns its place, though it sacrifices depth for brevity.

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?

With no output schema and zero parameter explanations, the description leaves the agent uninformed about pagination, default return fields, or OData syntax. For a listing tool with 4 parameters, this is insufficient for confident invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter meanings. It merely lists the parameter names without describing what $top, $filter, $select, or $orderby do semantically, adding minimal value over the 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's action ('List') and resource ('users'), distinct from siblings like get_user. It is specific and unambiguous, with the title reinforcing the Microsoft 365 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?

The description implies usage for enumerating users but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_user or list_groups. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool references are provided.

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