get_active_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'active/logged-in' filter, which clarifies scope but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as how 'active' is determined, real-time nature, or any limitations. It offers modest value beyond annotations.

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, short sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no filler. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 is simple, read-only, and has an output schema, so return values are covered by the schema. However, the description is incomplete regarding the device parameter and usage context. It does not explain whether the parameter is optional or how to target a specific device, which is a notable gap given the 0% schema parameter coverage.

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 input schema has one optional parameter 'device' with no description (schema coverage 0%). The description does not mention this parameter at all, so it fails to compensate for the low schema coverage. The agent is left to infer the parameter's meaning solely from its name, which is insufficient.

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 ('Gets') and a clearly scoped resource ('currently active/logged-in users'), which precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_users (all users) and get_user (a single user). The qualifier 'active/logged-in' adds concrete scope.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring a specific device parameter, or comparison with list_users. The usage context is only implied by the tool name, not stated.

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