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 simply states that it lists all users, but does not mention pagination, the effect of the limit parameter, or any authorization requirements. The implied read-only behavior is not explicitly confirmed, and important operational details are absent.

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, clear sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, earning high marks for conciseness, even though it sacrifices detail.

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 pagination parameters and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not mention that results are paginated, the response format, or any behavioral caveats, leaving the agent without a complete understanding of how to fully utilize the tool.

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 fully describes both parameters (limit and cursor) with descriptions and constraints, providing 100% schema coverage. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema already specifies, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'users' and scope 'in the Fivetran account'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_connections or invite_user, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 such as list_teams or search. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison to other tools, leaving the agent without explicit selection criteria.

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