List all users in a Hex workspace with pagination and sorting controls to audit or manage workspace membership.
List all users in the Hex workspace. Supports pagination (limit, after).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | Pagination cursor | |
| limit | No | Page size (1-100, default 25) | |
| sortBy | No | Sort field | |
| sortDirection | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds useful pagination behavior (limit, after) beyond the schema, but omits that this is a read-only operation, any permission/auth requirements, and how to traverse all pages. The 'list' verb implies read-only but is never stated.
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, front-loaded with the primary purpose before the pagination note. No wasted words, though the second sentence is thin.
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 read-only list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete: it ignores the sorting parameters and doesn't describe anything about the returned user set or pagination termination.
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 coverage is 75%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description reinforces that limit and after are pagination controls, which adds modest value, but it says nothing about sortBy or sortDirection despite those being real parameters.
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 all users in the Hex workspace.' An agent can tell this apart from the sibling hex-deactivate-user, but the description doesn't mention the sibling or further scope details, so it's clear without being maximally differentiating.
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?
Usage is implied by the name and 'List all users' phrasing – the only user-related sibling is a mutation (hex-deactivate-user), so alternatives are obvious by contrast. However, there is no explicit when/when-not statement or prerequisite guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.