registry_get_users

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, requires administrative privileges, or what happens with invalid paths. Since no annotations are present, the description carries full burden but provides minimal disclosure.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is too sparse for a tool with one required parameter. It achieves conciseness at the expense of 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 the simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description still lacks completeness. It does not explain the output format, edge cases, or how it differs from similar tools. The context from sibling tools suggests a registry-focused environment, but the description does not leverage this.

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 only parameter 'sam_path' is not explained in the description. With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to add any meaning (e.g., expected format, registry path vs file path). This is a critical gap.

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 'Get user accounts from SAM hive' states a specific verb and resource, indicating the tool retrieves user account information from a specific registry hive. However, it lacks detail on what exactly is returned (e.g., usernames, SIDs) and does not distinguish from other registry tools like registry_get_key.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling registry tools (e.g., registry_get_key, registry_search). No context about prerequisites or alternatives is provided.

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