usergroups_users_list

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'list all users' with no info on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or pagination. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 sentence with no wasted words, making it concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it could benefit from a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema (mentioned but not shown), the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks context about usage, prerequisites, and behavioral details, making it only partially complete for a tool with 3 parameters and several siblings.

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 100% description coverage for all 3 parameters, so the schema already provides parameter meaning. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, earning the baseline of 3.

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 lists users in a user group, distinguishing it from sibling tools like usergroups_list (which lists groups) and usergroups_users_update (which updates users). However, it doesn't specify whether it includes disabled users, which is handled by a parameter.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites mentioned, and no exclusions. The agent has no help deciding between this and related tools like usergroups_list or usergroups_users_update.

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