aap_list_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read behavior is covered. The description adds the return format ('str: JSON with user list') and filtering capability, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, ordering, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema shows. No contradictions with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by an illustrative example and a clear Args/Returns breakdown. It is appropriately sized, with every sentence contributing useful information and no redundancy.

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 simple list tool, the description covers the essential operational details: what it does, key parameters, an example, and the return type. It lacks some context like default pagination values and whether results are ordered, but those are largely covered by the input schema, which specifies defaults and maximums. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0% per the context signals, the description compensates well by explicitly listing all parameters (page, page_size, search, is_superuser) with types and concise explanations. The example also clarifies how to use the is_superuser filter, adding practical meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states 'List AAP users' with a specific verb and resource. It includes an example ('List users with admin privileges') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like aap_get_user, aap_create_user, aap_update_user, and aap_delete_user by focusing on listing.

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 an example of filtering for superusers, which implies when to use the filter. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives (e.g., aap_get_user for a single user) or state when not to use it. The usage is implied but not fully specified.

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