itglue_list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the permission requirement but does not reveal other behaviors like response structure, pagination limits (though schema implies defaults), or whether it returns all users or only those accessible to the key. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Exceptionally concise: two sentences covering purpose, distinction, permissions, and supported filters. No redundancy, front-loaded with crucial information.

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 6 parameters (all optional), no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides basic purpose, permission context, and filter list. Missing details on return structure, pagination behavior, or error cases. Adequate for a list tool but could be more complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond schema: explains that 'name', 'email', 'roleName' are filters and elaborates on the formatOptions parameter (compact, fields, omitEmpty). This extra explanation justifies a 4.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'list', resource 'IT Glue users', and distinguishes from 'contacts'. Explicitly says 'people with login access', providing specificity and differentiating from sibling tools like itglue_list_contacts.

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?

Mentions potential admin permission requirement and lists supported filters, offering some usage context. However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., itglue_get_user for a single user) or when not to use it.

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