infomaniak_list_hosting_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, covering the safety profile. The description adds that results include environment and SSH flag, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, or error behavior. This is acceptable given the read-only nature.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loaded verb, and concise parenthetical about output fields. Every word earns 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 listing tool with one parameter, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description is sufficient. It states the resource and included fields, and the schema covers the required input. It could mention that hosting_id is required, but that is already in the schema, so the description remains complete.

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 one required parameter (hosting_id) with 0% description coverage. The description refers to 'a web hosting' but never mentions 'hosting_id' or explains how to identify the hosting. The agent must infer the parameter from the schema alone, so the description adds no semantic value for the parameter.

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 uses the verb 'List' with a specific resource ('FTP/SSH users') scoped to 'a web hosting', and mentions included fields (environment, SSH flag). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_hostings or create_hosting_user.

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 implies the tool is for enumerating users on a specific web hosting, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as create_hosting_user or list_database_users. No when-not or alternative guidance is given.

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