get_all_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the de-duplication process, default groups for Jira Server/DC limitations, and status filtering. It does not cover performance or permission requirements, but it is still substantial.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence and bulleted args. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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 has two simple parameters and an output schema is available, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior. It explains the unique need for the tool in Jira Server/DC environments.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description fully covers both parameters: `groups` defaults to license groups, and `status` defaults to 'active' with clear definitions for values 'active', 'inactive', and 'all'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'List all Jira users' and explains the unique mechanism of enumerating group memberships for Jira Server/DC, clearly distinguishing the tool's purpose from sibling tools like search_users.

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?

It describes when to use the default behavior (union of Jira Software license groups) and how to target specific groups via the `groups` parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or point to alternatives like search_users for name-based searches.

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