Find LinkedIn Email

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it uses Potarix Enricher API credits, which is useful beyond annotations, but does not disclose potential error states or rate limits.

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 sentences, each purposeful: first states the tool's action and resource, second notes resource usage. No waste, front-loaded.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and a key behavioral detail (API credits). It is adequate but could mention expected output or error handling.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's 'LinkedIn profile URL' description, lacking details on format or validation.

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 finds a verified email from a LinkedIn profile URL, specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like find_company_emails and find_person_email by focusing on LinkedIn URLs.

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 implies use when a LinkedIn profile URL is available, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. The mention of API credits gives some cost context, but no exclusion criteria.

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