io_list_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that search, pagination and sorting are supported, which is useful capability context, but says nothing about auth needs, rate limits, or default result behavior beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

Two short sentences, capability front-loaded, zero filler or restatement of the name.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and an annotation covering safety, the description is adequate; the main omission is routing guidance against the sibling list/get tools, which is a minor gap given the simplicity of the operation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters (including the detailed view enum semantics and pagination defaults). The description's mention of search/pagination/sorting only loosely echoes what the schema already specifies, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List iOffice users'), and enumerates the supported operations (search, pagination, sorting). It is clearly separable from io_get_user, but it does not distinguish itself from the many other io_list_* siblings beyond the resource name.

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?

Listing users is an obvious enough operation that when-to-use is implied, but the description names no alternatives (e.g., io_get_user for a single record) and gives no conditions or prerequisites for choosing this tool.

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