user_active

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses the non-obvious behavioral trait that an empty list is returned rather than an error when no one is logged in or when /user/active is unavailable. Missing pagination or permission/read-only notes, which limits this to a 4.

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?

Front-loads the resource and endpoint, lists the returned fields compactly, then adds the empty-list guarantee in a separate short paragraph. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; the description still helpfully summarizes the key fields and, crucially, documents the empty-list/error-absence behavior that an agent needs when interpreting results. Complete for a simple read tool.

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?

Only one parameter (device_name) with 0% schema description coverage, but the single required parameter is self-explanatory from its name and the description's framing. The description adds no format or constraint details for device_name, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (list) and resource (active login sessions via /user/active), enumerates the returned fields, and explicitly contrasts with the sibling `users` tool (configured accounts vs. live sessions). An agent can distinguish this from `users` and `hotspot_active` without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly frames the use case: 'who is logged into the device's own management right now, as opposed to `users`' CONFIGURED accounts,' naming the sibling alternative and the condition that selects it. There is no when-not-to-use guidance, but the differentiation is clear enough for correct selection.

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