grocy_users_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful disclosure beyond that — passwords are redacted in the response — but says nothing about pagination, sorting, or whether inactive users are included.

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?

Three compact fragments, front-loaded with the action and resource with zero filler. The telegraphic style is efficient, though the endpoint string is marginally less useful to an agent than a sentence about scope.

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?

For a parameterless read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, the description covers purpose, scope, and the one surprising output trait (redaction). With no output schema present, a brief note on what fields each user record contains would make it fully complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. Including a parameter list would add no value here.

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 ("List Grocy users") and pins the underlying endpoint, so the agent can distinguish it from grocy_users_create/update/delete. It does not explicitly differentiate from near-neighbours like grocy_current_user or grocy_user_permissions, which is the only remaining ambiguity.

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 call this versus alternatives such as grocy_current_user (single user) or grocy_user_permissions. The description gives no prerequisites, no exclusions, and no routing cues.

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