ds_list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists users, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential side effects, permissions required, or the structure of the response. The debugging hint is contextual but not behavioral.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and an additional use case. Every word earns its place, and there is no unnecessary verbosity.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description must compensate by explaining the return value or behavior. It does neither, leaving the agent to infer the response format. However, the tool is simple and has no parameters, so a minimal description is somewhat acceptable, but it still lacks important context.

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 input schema is empty. According to the rules, a 0-parameter tool receives a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to explain parameters that do not exist.

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 tool's purpose: to list all DS users. It uses a specific verb ('list') and a clear resource ('users'), and it provides an additional debugging context that distinguishes it from sibling tools like ds_list_resources and ds_list_projects.

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 specific use case: 'useful for debugging workflow user_id foreign key issues.' This gives a clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. This is sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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