list_users

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, the description adds useful context: the visibility scope ('this API key can see, which is the whole team') and the default filtering behavior for disabled users. It does not cover pagination behavior or permissions beyond API key scope, but those gaps are minor given the annotations.

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?

Two succinct sentences with zero waste. The scope is front-loaded, followed by the default filtering rule, making every sentence earn its place.

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 simple read-only list tool with a fully described input schema and an output schema, the description supplies the essential behavioral context: API-key scope and disabled-user default. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call this correctly.

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 the schema already documents limit, query, offset, and include_disabled in detail. The description restates only the default disabled-user filtering, which is already in the schema description for include_disabled, and adds no new semantics for the other parameters.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('users'), and adds a clear scope: 'the users this API key can see, which is the whole team.' It distinguishes itself from resource siblings like list_tasks and from the singular get_user by verb and resource, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

Provides an implicit condition for the include_disabled parameter ('Disabled users are left out unless asked for') but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over get_user or other user-related endpoints. Usage is implied by the verb 'List' and the scope statement.

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