iam/2018-01-01/ListUsers

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic purpose. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, or response characteristics. No value is added beyond the name.

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 lacks necessary detail. It is under-specified for a tool with three parameters and no output schema, failing to front-load critical usage information.

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?

The description is incomplete. No output schema exists, and the description does not explain list behavior, pagination, or any limitations. It fails to provide sufficient context for effective tool use.

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 schema has 100% coverage for three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a score 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 '获取IAM用户列表' which clearly indicates the tool retrieves a list of IAM users. It is a specific verb and resource. However, there are no sibling tools to differentiate, so it does not achieve the highest score.

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 is provided on when to use this tool or how it compares to alternatives. The description lacks any context for selection, and no sibling tools are mentioned to indicate differentiation.

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