Scrape a Sales Navigator (or standard LinkedIn) search URL and return raw LinkedIn search results. This tool does not save the results as Salesbot contacts. For each profile you want to keep or add to a campaign, call upsert_linkedin_contact with its profile URL to obtain a contact_id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (1-100, default 10) | |
| search_url | Yes | Full LinkedIn search URL |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it is a scraper that returns raw results and does not persist them as Salesbot contacts. This is a useful, non-obvious disclosure about side effects. Nothing contradicts the provided annotations.
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 with no wasted words: the first states the core action and output, the second explains a key non-behavior and the downstream tool to use. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.
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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the input trigger, the non-persistence behavior, and the recommended downstream action. A minor gap is that the exact shape of 'raw LinkedIn search results' is not specified, but the description still gives enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly.
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 input schema already documents both parameters fully, including limit defaults, so the description does not need to add much. It mentions the search_url concept but adds no meaningful parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema.
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?
Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Scrape a Sales Navigator (or standard LinkedIn) search URL' and says it returns raw results. It also distinguishes itself by stating it does not save results as Salesbot contacts, so an agent can separate it from upsert_linkedin_contact.
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 clearly indicates this tool is for URLs already constructed on Sales Navigator or standard LinkedIn, and explicitly routes follow-up via upsert_linkedin_contact when a profile should be kept or added to a campaign. It does not explicitly compare against alternative search tools like search_linkedin_people, but the URL-based trigger is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is some overlap among search tools (search_job_postings, search_google_xray, search_linkedin_people, search_web) and messaging tools (send_connection_request, send_linkedin_message, reply_to_chat). However, detailed descriptions clarify the differences.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., add_contacts_to_campaign, list_campaigns). No mixing of conventions.
48 tools is high but justifiable given the broad domain (LinkedIn outreach, CRM, campaigns, job postings, etc.). However, some tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple search tools).
The tool set covers the entire workflow: searching, connecting, messaging, campaign management, CRM operations (fields, stages, tasks, notes), job postings, and posting. No obvious gaps.
