search_people

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the action without detailing rate limits, pagination, default behavior (e.g., whether term is required), or result structure. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with action and resource. However, it lacks structure like usage examples or breakdown, but it is efficiently short.

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?

Complex tool with optional parameters (3 top-level, nested object with 8 fields). No output schema, so agent cannot infer return shape. Description does not explain default behavior when no parameters provided or how to combine term and filter. Incomplete for safe autonomous invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds 'applying various filtering criteria' which hints at the filter object, but doesn't clarify nuances beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., AND logic is in schema). No additional semantic value.

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 action 'search' and resource 'people', and mentions filtering criteria. It distinguishes from 'fetch_person' (single) but not from sibling 'nv_search_people', which has identical name. However, the base purpose is clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'nv_search_people', 'fetch_person', or 'retrieve_connections'. Missing context for optimal selection.

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