get_user_list

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

The description discloses key behaviors: it queries user accounts, shows enabled/disabled status, email, domain, and creation/modification timestamps. It states the return format as JSON. Without annotations, it adequately covers behavior, though it omits potential error conditions or pagination.

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 concise, with a clear main sentence, a bullet list summarizing functions, a usage note, and a return statement. Every sentence adds value, and the structure front-loads the essential purpose.

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 parameterless list tool with an output schema, the description covers the purpose, scope ('current domain'), returned fields, and usage context. It is complete without extraneous information.

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 0 parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters and does not add misleading information.

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 it retrieves a list of OpenStack users in the current domain, specifying included details like status, email, and timestamps. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on other resources (e.g., floating IPs, instances).

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use when user requests user management information, identity queries, or user administration tasks.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but given no direct sibling for user listing, this is sufficient.

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