remnawave_users_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only hints at sensitivity with '(sensitive-read)' but does not disclose side effects, rate limits, pagination, or result format. This is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 extremely concise but at the cost of completeness. A single fragment 'Remnawave users.list (sensitive-read)' is insufficient to convey purpose, usage, or parameters. It is under-specified, not efficiently concise.

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 no output schema and the tool's complexity (4 parameters, one nested object), the description is wholly inadequate. It does not explain the return value, required parameters, or behavior, making it nearly useless for an AI agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning to any of the four parameters (payload, confirmToken, responseMode, mutationApproved). The payload object is especially cryptic. The agent cannot infer valid inputs from the description.

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 'users.list (sensitive-read)' indicates a list operation but is vague. It doesn't specify what entities are listed or any scope, though it distinguishes from individual retrieval tools. Sibling tools like remnawave_users_get_by_* clarify it's a bulk list, but the description lacks 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many specific retrieval tools (by email, id, etc.) and bulk operations, but the description provides no context for selection.

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