list_users_hidden_dropped

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds pagination clamping/default behavior, which is useful beyond the annotations, but it does not discuss authentication, response envelope, or other operational traits.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core statement 'Get dropped shows.' The parameter list is readable, and the pagination note is valuable despite being generic.

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?

The tool has an output schema and safe read-only annotations, so less return-value documentation is needed. Still, the description leaves gaps around the meaning of 'dropped' in this context, whose users are affected, and what values 'extended' accepts.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It gives meaning to all three parameters, with useful pagination detail, but 'extended: Extended information to include in the response' is largely tautological and does not clarify valid values or behavior.

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 states 'Get dropped shows.' which is a clear verb+resource pairing and matches the tool name and endpoint. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling hidden-section tools, but the specific 'dropped shows' scope is more precise than the name alone.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_users_hidden_by_section or list_users_hidden_progress_watched. The intended context is only implied by the endpoint path and the tool name.

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