List / search users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact – that passwords and secrets are never returned – but says nothing about pagination defaults, result ordering, or empty-result 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?

Three short sentences with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the search/pagination note and the security caveat. Efficient, though the final sentence is somewhat tangential to tool selection.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values, and it only partially does so (it states what is never returned, not what a user record contains). For a simple read-only list tool with fully documented parameters, this is adequate but leaves the response shape unexplained.

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 all four parameters (realm, max, first, search) are already documented with defaults and bounds in the schema. The description's mention of search and pagination adds no syntax, default, or format detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List users in a realm') plus the capabilities (free-text search, pagination), which is enough to separate it from get_user (single user) and count_users (aggregate count). It does not, however, explicitly name those siblings, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 asserts capabilities ('Supports free-text search and pagination') but never says when to use this tool instead of get_user or count_users, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. An agent must infer the routing decision from the names alone.

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