list_users

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

The description adds a behavioral nuance about visibility to the authenticated identity, which is not fully covered by the annotations. However, the annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior, so the incremental transparency is modest.

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 concise sentence that directly states the core function. It contains no fluff or extraneous details, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 description is minimal and does not cover parameter semantics or usage context. In an environment with many overlapping list tools, the lack of differentiation and missing parameter details leaves the agent without enough information to make a confident selection and invocation.

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 defines limit, disabled_only, and name_contains with no descriptions, and the description does not elaborate on their meaning or defaults. With zero parameter explanation in either the description or schema fields, the agent cannot infer how to use them correctly.

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 states the verb 'lists' and the resource 'Entra ID users', which is clear in isolation. However, it does not differentiate from several similar sibling tools like list_entra_users or list_users_with_direct_permissions, leaving the agent to guess when this particular variant is appropriate.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many alternatives. No mention of filtering behavior, relationship to other list tools, or any condition that would make this tool the preferred choice.

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