Search User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no side effects are expected. The description adds operational details: the two different APIs used depending on deployment type, and the return format. This supplements the annotations well without contradiction.

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 well-structured with Args and Returns sections, and the main purpose is front-loaded. However, it is slightly verbose with repeated parameter details that are already in the schema. It could be more concise while retaining clarity.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description's mention of the return format is sufficient. It covers the cloud/server distinction and parameter behaviors. For a 3-parameter tool with good schema, this is complete enough, though lacking usage examples.

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 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The tool description repeats some parameter info but adds the cloud vs server distinction for group_name, and the Returns section clarifies the output. This adds marginal value 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?

The description clearly states 'Search Confluence users using CQL (Cloud) or group member API (Server/DC).' This provides a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_search (which searches content, not users).

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 explains the difference between Cloud and Server/DC usage, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like confluence_search or jira_get_user_profile. Usage context is implied but not formally stated.

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