asana_get_users_in_workspace

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 only says 'Get,' implying a read operation, but it does not mention pagination behavior, permissions, rate limits, or what data is returned per user. The schema shows limit/offset, but the description adds no behavioral detail beyond the verb.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without any filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain what user fields are returned or how pagination behaves. The tool has multiple parameters and no annotation support, yet the description is too sparse to understand the full context of the call without additional documentation.

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 describes all four parameters (limit, offset, opt_fields, workspace_gid) with complete descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get users in a workspace or organization.' It distinguishes from the sibling tool asana_get_users_in_team by specifying 'workspace or organization' rather than team, though it does not explicitly differentiate from asana_get_multiple_users.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like asana_get_users_in_team or asana_get_multiple_users. The description simply states the action without any contextual or exclusionary guidance.

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