get-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 mentions 'advanced filtering options' but fails to describe key traits like pagination behavior (implied by 'page' and 'perPage' parameters), authentication requirements (implied by required 'username' and 'password'), or potential rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with 17 parameters and no output schema.

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 that front-loads the core purpose ('Get a list of users from a WordPress site') and adds a useful qualifier ('with advanced filtering options'). There's no wasted text, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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 complexity (17 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the return format, pagination behavior, authentication needs, or error handling, leaving the agent with incomplete guidance for proper tool invocation in a real-world context.

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 schema already documents all 17 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by hinting at 'advanced filtering options,' but doesn't provide additional context beyond what the schema specifies, such as explaining how filters interact or typical use cases for parameters like 'context' or 'who.'

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 ('Get') and resource ('list of users from a WordPress site'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-user' (singular) or 'list-posts', which handle different resources, so it misses full sibling distinction.

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 mentions 'advanced filtering options' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify when to use 'get-users' versus 'get-user' (singular) or other list tools like 'list-posts', leaving usage context implied rather than stated.

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