zoom_list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it lists users with status filters, omitting important details like pagination (implied by page_size and next_page_token in schema), required permissions, rate limits, or whether it returns all users across pages. The agent is left unaware of these operational behaviors.

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 at two sentences and 15 words. The critical information (action, resource, filter) is front-loaded in the first sentence. Every word adds value; there is no redundant or tangential content. It is a model of efficient communication.

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 output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of user objects with fields). It also omits pagination behavior, though parameters imply it. For a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete, leaving substantial operational context unspecified.

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 input schema already documents all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond rephrasing the status filter. For page_size and next_page_token, no additional context is provided, but the schema descriptions are sufficient. Thus, the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 the action ('list all users') and the resource ('users'), making the purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zoom_get_user (single user) and zoom_list_meetings (different resource) by specifying the exact scope. The optional filter adds nuance without confusing the core task.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that for a single user, zoom_get_user is appropriate, or that for filtered subsets, other tools might exist. Usage context is entirely implicit from the tool name and basic action.

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