search_people

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Max 10 results per page,' but the input schema allows per_page up to 100, contradicting this claim. This undermines transparency. It does disclose free status and return fields, but the contradiction is significant.

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 relatively concise, covering purpose, cost, return fields, alternatives, and filter support in a few sentences. It is front-loaded with the key point. However, the inaccurate 'Max 10 results per page' detracts from overall quality, preventing 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?

Given 18 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a good high-level overview but fails to accurately describe pagination limits (misleading 'max 10') and omits details about additional return fields beyond the stated four. This is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds value by summarizing supported filters ('title, company, location, seniority, and more') and noting free usage, which helps the agent prioritize. This exceeds the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 tool searches for people in Apollo's database, specifies it is free, and distinguishes it from enrich_person by noting what it returns (name, title, company, LinkedIn URL) and what it does not (email/phone). The phrase 'primary discovery tool' reinforces its role.

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 tells when to use it (primary discovery, free) and when not to (for email/phone, use enrich_person instead, which costs credits). It also mentions alternatives like enrich_person, providing clear guidance.

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