list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions pagination and filtering, which hints at read-only and controlled output, but does not detail behavior like rate limits, ordering, or what happens on empty results. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 filler. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and capabilities without unnecessary words.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and five parameters with 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return format, pagination behavior, filtering options, and error handling, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0% and the description adds no parameter-specific details. The schema has five parameters (limit, offset, fields, team, include_deleted) but the description only generically mentions 'pagination and filtering'. It does not explain what 'fields' or 'team' mean, leaving ambiguity.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'users from OpenMetadata', and the features 'pagination and filtering'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from single-user retrieval tools like get_user or get_user_by_name.

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 implies usage for listing users with pagination and filtering, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_user for a single user). No exclusions or contextual triggers are provided.

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