list_users

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, so the description's burden is reduced, but it adds essentially nothing beyond that: no mention of permissions/scope needed, pagination limits, ordering, or rate limits. The only behavioral hint, 'страницу', is already implied by the schema's page/per_page fields.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the missing guidance elsewhere rather than being a virtue in itself.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the operation is simple. Still, with 0% schema coverage and several user-related siblings, the description leaves the agent without enough to choose this tool confidently over search_users.

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 must carry parameter meaning, but it only vaguely gestures at paging ('страницу') and never mentions per_page, defaults, or bounds. Both parameters are effectively undocumented in either place.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Получить страницу пользователей организации') and signals pagination via 'страницу'. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling search_users or get_user, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which user-listing tool to pick.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternatives (search_users, get_user, get_current_user). The agent must infer that this is the unfiltered org-wide listing and that search_users handles filtered queries.

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