users_list_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 says 'list' and mentions filters, but does not disclose potential side effects (none expected), authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. This is minimal transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the core action and optional filters efficiently, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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?

The description is sufficient for a simple list operation, but it lacks details about the return format or pagination behavior, especially since there is no output schema. The schema covers parameters, but the description doesn't mention that results are paginated or that cursor/limit control this, making it slightly incomplete.

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?

The input schema documents all four parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra parameter semantics. The mention of 'role or status' merely restates what the schema already lists, providing no additional meaning.

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 the action ('List') and the resource ('user accounts'), which distinguishes it from single-user tools like users_get_user. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from users_search_users, so it's not a perfect 5.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like users_search_users or users_get_user. The mention of optional filters implies some usage context, but there are no explicit exclusions or comparisons to siblings.

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