Retrieve account sub-users with their traffic usage and limits, and paginate through all results using next_page.
Sub-users of the account with their traffic usage and limits. No passwords.
Paged from page 1. When next_page is returned, call again with it for the
rest; a page past the end comes back empty.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the pagination contract (start at 1, resume via next_page, empty result past the end) and the security-relevant guarantee that no passwords are returned.
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?
Very short and front-loaded: the resource and payload come first, then the pagination behavior. Both sentences carry information, though the stray line break mid-sentence is cosmetic rather than wasteful.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the one non-obvious interaction detail an agent needs (how to paginate). For a single-optional-parameter read tool, this is close to complete, with only sibling differentiation left implicit.
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 0% and there is one parameter (page), so the description carries some burden. 'Paged from page 1' documents the starting convention, which is the only real semantic addition; it doesn't clarify whether page is 1-based offset semantics beyond the default, and next_page is referenced without being a declared input.
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?
Identifies the specific resource (sub-users of the account) and the payload (traffic usage and limits), and adds the exclusion 'No passwords.' The verb is only implied by the tool name, but the resource is clearly distinct from siblings like traffic_stats, top_domains, and proxy_url.
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?
Gives explicit operational guidance for pagination: start at page 1, and when next_page is returned call again with it; a page past the end comes back empty. However, it offers no guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings such as traffic_stats, which is implied but not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.