list_users

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which gives some context about capabilities, but fails to describe important behaviors like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, response format, or whether this is a read-only operation (implied by 'list' but not explicit).

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality upfront. Every word earns its place - 'List users from Okta' establishes the purpose, while 'with optional filtering and pagination' adds important contextual information without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a list operation with 6 well-documented parameters but no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It identifies the tool's purpose and hints at key features, but doesn't provide enough context about the response format, error handling, or integration patterns that would be helpful for an AI agent to use this tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing complete documentation for all 6 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'optional filtering and pagination' which aligns with the 'filter' and 'after/limit' parameters, but doesn't provide additional semantic context or usage examples beyond what's already in the parameter descriptions.

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 ('List') and resource ('users from Okta'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_user' by indicating it returns multiple users rather than a single one, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list operations like 'list_groups'.

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 like 'get_user' (for single users) or 'list_group_users' (for users within a group). It mentions optional filtering and pagination but doesn't explain when these features are appropriate or what scenarios warrant this tool over others.

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