xero_list_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a list operation, implying it's read-only, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the return format looks like. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple list tool and front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but lacks completeness. It doesn't explain the return values or any behavioral context, which is a gap since no annotations or output schema are provided. However, for a simple list tool, it meets the bare minimum.

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 has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and a baseline score of 4 is appropriate as it doesn't introduce confusion or omissions regarding inputs.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('users in the Xero organization'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'xero_list_expense_claims' or other list tools, which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 includes a parenthetical note 'for expense claims,' which implies a usage context but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'xero_list_expense_claims' or other list tools. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is provided.

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