Count Collection Users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, which cover the safety and idempotency profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as authentication requirements, response format, or error handling.

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. It is concise and to the point, though it could be slightly expanded to include more context without sacrificing brevity.

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 tool's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema, good annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not mention that the tool returns a single integer count, nor does it elaborate on the effect of the optional 'role' filter. This leaves some ambiguity for the agent.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters (collId and role), so the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. The description does not explain how the 'role' parameter filters the count, but the schema already describes it as a filter.

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's purpose: 'Get the number of users in a collection.' This is a specific verb+resource pair that differentiates from sibling tools like transkribus_coll_user_list (lists users) and transkribus_coll_user_stats (statistics).

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 such as transkribus_coll_user_list or transkribus_coll_user_stats. It does not mention any prerequisites, context for use, or when not to use it.

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