slack_list_users

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose pagination behavior via limit and cursor and states that the result is a member list with pagination metadata. It does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or whether deactivated members are included, but these are moderate omissions for a simple read-only list tool.

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 and well organized with a one-sentence purpose followed by Args and Returns sections. Every line adds useful information and there is no redundant prose.

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 low-complexity paginated list tool, the description covers both parameters and the return shape. An output schema exists, so the return values need not be detailed beyond what is given. It falls slightly short only by omitting explicit guidance on how to keep paging with the cursor and any membership inclusion caveats.

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 0%, and the description compensates fully: it documents the 1-1000 limit range, the default of 200, and cursor as 'Pagination cursor from previous response'. Without this text, the schema only reveals bare types and defaults.

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 opens with 'List users in the Slack workspace', which is a specific verb plus a clearly bounded resource. The workspace scope differentiates it from sibling tools like slack_list_channel_members that target channel-scoped memberships.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as slack_get_user_info for a single user or slack_list_channel_members for channel members. The intended use is only implied by the tool name and summary.

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