Список пользователей S3-хранилищ

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

The description states a read operation ('Возвращает' - returns) while annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, which indicates the tool may not be read-only. This is a direct contradiction. Although the description adds a valuable caveat about secret_key, the contradiction overrides any positive contribution, resulting in a score of 1.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states the purpose and return fields, the second adds a relevant security note about secret_key. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 the tool's low complexity (no parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains what is returned and offers a practical caution about secret_key. It does not describe the full response format or pagination, but for a simple list operation this is acceptable.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). According to the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter information because there is nothing to add.

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 a specific verb 'Возвращает' (returns) and clearly identifies the resource: all administrator users of S3 storages of the account. It also lists the returned fields (id, access_key), making its purpose unambiguous. It is easily distinguishable from the sibling update_bucket_user and other listing tools.

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 this is the tool to use when you need the list of S3 storage admin users. It also provides guidance on not relying on secret_key from the response and instead using update_bucket_user for updates. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or alternative listing tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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