Account Users: List all Account Users

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the exact auth mechanism (Platform app API key in the api-access-token header) and the fact that text is passed through unchanged with Persian/Arabic-Indic digit handling, which affects how an agent should format inputs.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, followed by endpoint, auth, and encoding notes in a compact block. Every line carries information, though the Persian/Arabic-Indic digit caveat is somewhat generic boilerplate that could be trimmed for a tightly scoped reader.

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 single-parameter read that needs no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, and auth, which is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. Only pagination/filtering or result-shape hints are absent, and those are minor for a list 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single account_id parameter is already documented as 'The numeric ID of the account'. The description adds nothing further about the parameter, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all account users'), clearly separating it from the create_account_user and delete_account_user siblings by the 'List' verb. It does not, however, explicitly name the alternative tools or scope the listing (e.g. pagination), so sibling differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and never references alternatives. The only extra context (endpoint path, auth header) is invocation mechanics, not usage guidance, leaving the agent to infer when to call this versus related list tools.

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