sophos_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. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination (though parameters exist), rate limits, or required permissions. Only the action is stated, omitting important side effects or constraints.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is efficient, though it could include brief usage context without losing conciseness.

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 5 parameters, including pagination (page_key, page_size), filtering (search, source_type), and a required tenant_id, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how to use the parameters together, the return format, or pagination behavior. The schema partially covers parameter descriptions, but the description lacks overall 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% with all parameters documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it is a baseline 3. No parameter-specific context is provided in the description.

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 directory users in a Sophos Central tenant' clearly states the verb (List), resource (directory users), and scope (in a Sophos Central tenant). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like sophos_list_users_in_group or sophos_get_user.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sophos_get_user for a single user, sophos_list_users_in_group for group members). There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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