list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the required scope; it does not state what happens with the query parameter, whether pagination is involved, what user fields are returned, or if suspended users are included. The behavior is largely opaque.

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, front-loaded sentence that is efficient and avoids waste. However, it is almost too brief, omitting information that would improve its value. Still, for what it conveys, it is well-structured and concise.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the query parameter's effect, what data is returned, or any behavior beyond listing users. The absence of annotations and output schema increases the description's responsibility, which it fails to meet.

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 schema has one optional 'query' parameter with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving its meaning completely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 'List workspace users' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (workspace users), distinguishing it from sibling tools like change_user_role, invite_user, and remove_user which perform different actions. The purpose is unambiguous and directly communicates what the tool does.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no context about scenarios where listing users is appropriate. The only additional info is the required scope '[requires: users.list]', which is a prerequisite, not a usage guideline.

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