Search LinkedIn People (Not Available)

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations, the description discloses a critical behavioral trait: it returns a clear error message explaining the limitation under standard OAuth. This prevents an agent from expecting real results and is a valuable addition.

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 warning is front-loaded and the error behavior is stated clearly in a few sentences. The Args list is redundant with the schema but does not make the description unnecessarily long or unclear.

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 tool whose observable behavior is to fail with a clear error, the description is complete: it explains availability constraints, required prerequisites, and expected error behavior. No output schema is needed because the tool does not return real search results under normal circumstances.

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 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description's Args block largely repeats that information without adding semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 identifies the tool as searching LinkedIn members by keywords, and immediately flags that it is not available with standard OAuth. The title also reinforces this limitation. This is a specific verb and resource, unambiguously differentiated from reading profiles or posts.

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 explicitly warns that the tool is NOT available with standard OAuth and explains that Sales Navigator API or a third-party provider is required. It gives clear when-not-to-use guidance, though it does not point to a specific sibling tool as an alternative.

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