missive_list_users

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

Adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by stating the tool lists users across organizations the token belongs to and explains the optional filter. No contradictions with 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?

Two concise sentences, first summarizing purpose and returned fields, second clarifying filter. No extraneous information; front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

Covers scope, filter, and read-only nature. Pagination details are in schema. No output schema, but description sufficiently explains what is returned. Slightly incomplete without mentioning the return format is a list, but schema implies it.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description essentially restates the organization filter behavior, adding no new semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'lists' and the resource 'users', with specific fields returned (id, name, email, avatar_url, me). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_contacts or list_teams by focusing on users and token owner 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?

Provides clear context on the optional organization filter and default behavior when omitted. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance on filtering is sufficient.

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