apollo_list_users

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

Without annotations, description should fully disclose behavior. It indicates output includes IDs but does not mention pagination (despite page/per_page parameters), rate limits, or that it is a safe read operation. Behavioral traits are partially described but incomplete.

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?

Description is two sentences and front-loaded with the main action. It is concise, though could include a quick note on parameters without becoming verbose.

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?

Given optional pagination parameters and output schema, description lacks parameter usage context and fails to mention pagination behavior. It notes the utility of returned IDs but is not complete for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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 description adds no meaning to the parameters 'page' and 'per_page'. The agent must infer from parameter names alone, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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?

Description clearly states 'List teammates (users) in your Apollo account.' It specifies the action and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like apollo_search_contacts by focusing on users/teammates. The mention of returning IDs needed for owner_id/user_id adds specificity.

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?

Description mentions requirement of a master Apollo API key, but provides no guidance on when to use vs alternatives like apollo_search_contacts or apollo_get_person. No explicit exclusions or contexts given.

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