Listar usuários de tickets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read operation via 'Lista', but says nothing about return volume, ordering, pagination, or whether inactive users are included ('cadastrados' is ambiguous), which matters for an unfiltered list.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded and no wasted words. It is minimal, though it could have used the space to add scope detail rather than stopping at a bare noun phrase.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description is minimally sufficient to identify the resource, but it omits when to choose it over buscar_usuarios_por_nome and gives no sense of what the returned user list contains.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema; the baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it lists the users/operators registered in the ticket system. An agent can tell this is a user-listing tool, but the description does not distinguish it from the close sibling buscar_usuarios_por_nome, so sibling differentiation is absent.

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. The sibling conjunto includes buscar_usuarios_por_nome, which is the obvious alternative for retrieving users, and the description never explains when this unfiltered list is preferred over that search.

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