slack_list_users

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

The description declares the tool is read-only and notes the intentional omission of email, providing some behavioral context. However, without annotations, additional details like rate limits or pagination behavior are missing.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and key constraints.

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 2 parameters, the description covers the returned fields, omissions, and read-only nature. Lack of output schema is compensated by the explicit return field list.

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%, but description adds value by stating the default limit of 100, which is not in the schema. It does not elaborate on cursor, but the schema description for cursor is already present.

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 (listing users), resource (Slack workspace users), and explicitly lists the returned fields (id, name, real name, bot flag). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like slack_user_info by noting it returns a list.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as slack_user_info for a single user. Usage is implied but not differentiated.

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