yaaif_user_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that this is a list operation, the fields returned, and the permission needed. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, filter semantics, or whether partial results are possible.

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 short sentences deliver the essential purpose, output shape, permission requirement, and a concrete use case. There is no filler or irrelevant detail.

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, the description is minimally viable: it names the resource, output fields, auth requirement, and a typical workflow. But with no output schema and undocumented optional parameters, it is incomplete for agents needing filtering or pagination details.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description never explains q, limit, or active. The parenthetical '(name, email, role, active)' describes output fields rather than parameters, so an agent receives no description-based guidance for correctly using the optional inputs.

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 and resource: 'List tenant users' and states the returned fields (name, email, role, active). It also anchors the tool's purpose by noting it is used before yaaif_user_role_set, which helps distinguish it from user-management siblings.

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 a clear usage context: admins should call this before yaaif_user_role_set, and it states the required permission (users:read). It does not explicitly mention when to prefer yaaif_user_get instead, so exclusion guidance is absent.

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