list_all_owned_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without any details on permissions required, rate limits, output format, pagination, or whether it's a read-only or destructive operation. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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 extremely concise—a single phrase—with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and to the point, though this brevity contributes to underspecification in other dimensions.

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 lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and a single undocumented parameter, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide necessary context for the agent to understand the tool's behavior, inputs, or outputs, making it inadequate for effective use.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the single required parameter 'domain'. It does not explain what 'domain' represents, its format, or its role in filtering results, leaving the parameter entirely undocumented.

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 all owned user(s)' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration. It specifies the verb 'List' and resource 'owned user(s)', but lacks detail on what 'owned' means in this context or how it differs from similar tools like 'list_all_owned_enabled_users'. This is borderline tautological with the name.

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. With many sibling tools focused on users (e.g., 'list_all_owned_enabled_users', 'list_all_enabled_users'), the description offers no context, prerequisites, or distinctions, leaving the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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