Find User

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals key behavior: case-insensitive partial matching and provides a concrete example. It does not discuss edge cases like multiple matches or no results, but for a simple lookup tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and matching semantics. Every element adds value with no redundancy.

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 search tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential search behavior and gives an example. It lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer alternatives, but the tool's scope is narrow and clear enough to be actionable.

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%, so the description must compensate for the bare string parameter. It does: it explains that name_query is a username and can be a partial, case-insensitive match, supported by the example 'wilke'.

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's purpose: finding users by username, with specific matching behavior (partial, case-insensitive). It is distinct from all sibling tools, which operate on channels, posts, DMs, and messages rather than 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 intended use is implied: use this when you need to find a user by a full or partial username. However, the description does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative tool for user-related operations.

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