get_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies read-only access, the description does not explicitly confirm this is safe/non-destructive, disclose pagination behavior, mention rate limits, or describe what user data fields are returned.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Get'. Zero redundancy. However, given the complete lack of annotations and output schema, the extreme brevity leaves significant behavioral context undocumented, preventing a perfect score.

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?

Adequate for identifying the operation but incomplete regarding behavioral expectations. Without output schema or annotations, the description should ideally explain that this returns a paginated list of user objects and may require multiple calls for large organizations.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage (start and limit are fully documented). The description adds no parameter-specific context, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the semantic load.

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?

States specific verb (Get), resource (users), and scope (from Pipedrive). The parenthetical '(salespersons)' adds helpful specificity distinguishing internal users from 'persons' (contacts) in Pipedrive terminology, and 'all' distinguishes it from sibling 'get_user'. However, it doesn't explicitly clarify the difference between users and persons for agents unfamiliar with Pipedrive's data model.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_items' or sibling 'get_user'. Does not mention pagination requirements for large user bases or when to prefer single-user lookup versus listing all users.

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