List Users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses authentication scope ('authenticated user belongs to') but does not detail pagination behavior, rate limits, or other facets beyond what the schema implies. The description is adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentences: first states the core function, second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with the most important 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?

For a simple list tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, scope, and a typical use case. No additional context is necessary given the sibling tools and schema richness.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 clearly states the verb 'lists', resource 'users', and scope 'in organizations the authenticated user belongs to'. It also provides a specific use case ('find user IDs for assignments'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_contacts or list_organizations.

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 provides a clear usage context ('Use this to find user IDs for assignments'), which helps the agent understand when to invoke it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives, though the sibling set makes the purpose fairly obvious.

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