find_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned fields, but since an output schema exists that information is largely redundant and no pagination, result-limit, or empty-result behavior is disclosed.

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 tight sentences with the core capability front-loaded and no filler. The return-value sentence is somewhat redundant given the output schema, which keeps it from a 5.

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 one-parameter read-only search tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential scope. Only secondary details like result limits or search-syntax edge cases are absent.

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 single 'query' parameter has no schema description, so the description must carry the load. It does say the query accepts names, emails, or general Zendesk search syntax, which is meaningful, but it gives no syntax examples, quoting rules, or format constraints.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find users') plus the searchable fields, and names the return shape. It is distinguishable from find_tickets, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with that sibling.

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 mention of 'name, email or any term of the Zendesk search syntax' implies how to use it, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to siblings like find_tickets or whoami.

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