rybbit_get_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the result is paginated, which is already implied by schema parameters. It doesn't disclose the return format, default sorting/pagination, or whether this is a read-only operation (though 'Get' hints at it). No mention of required siteId context or filtering behavior.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action verb 'Get', and contains no filler. Every word earns its place and it is easy to parse quickly.

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?

Despite having 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal and doesn't explain the return structure, default pagination behavior, or the meaning of 'analytics data'. It lacks usage context and fails to compensate for the complexity, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior without additional inference.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides; 'analytics data' hints at the output fields, but doesn't clarify parameter semantics. The schema itself already documents all 12 parameters, including formats, enums, and alternatives (e.g., date-based vs pastMinutes).

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 a specific action ('Get'), the resource ('a paginated list of users'), and a qualifier ('with analytics data'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_user_info (single user) and get_user_sessions (user sessions), though it could be more explicit about which analytics metrics are included.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. Sibling tools like get_user_info, get_user_sessions, and get_user_session_count exist, but the description doesn't differentiate use cases or mention any exclusions. The only hint is 'list of users with analytics data', which implies usage for bulk user listing.

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