enumerate_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While the description implies a read operation ('enumerate'), it does not mention safety, permissions, or any behavioral traits such as whether it triggers side effects, requires authentication, or has rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 sentence, front-loads the main action ('Enumerate all system users'), and includes the critical differentiation from list_users. Every word serves a purpose, with no waste.

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 parameters, no output schema, and a clear comparison with a sibling tool (list_users), the description is largely complete for this simple enumeration tool. It could optionally note the output format or behavior, but the core purpose and distinction are well covered.

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 tool has zero parameters (0 params) and the input schema provides 100% coverage. According to the scoring guidelines, with 0 parameters the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, so this score 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?

Description clearly states the tool enumerates all system users including system accounts, and explicitly distinguishes from list_users by noting it is broader and includes accounts list_users may omit. This provides a specific verb and resource with sibling differentiation.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool versus list_users: when you need all users including system accounts, as opposed to only OMV-managed accounts. This clear alternative usage guidance helps the agent choose correctly.

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