Filter and retrieve ServiceNow users by criteria such as status or department, with configurable result limits.
List users with optional search filter
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default: 20) | |
| query | No | Filter (e.g., "active=true^departmentLIKEIT") |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat them. However, it adds no further behavioral context such as pagination or result limitations.
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 a single concise sentence that conveys the core purpose. While efficient, it could be slightly more structured with additional context.
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 with annotations and full schema coverage, the description is adequate but lacks mention of return fields or pagination behavior, which would improve completeness.
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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It simply restates the filter capability.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('users') and mentions an optional search filter, clearly distinguishing it from other list tools targeting different entities.
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 like query_records or nlq_query, and does not specify if it is for all users or filtered sets.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.