identities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only lists variables and provides an example filter structure, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, pagination semantics, or any side effects. The example adds minor context but lacks substantial behavioral disclosure.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. The example JSON is verbose but serves as valuable documentation. It earns its place by illustrating the filter structure, keeping the overall description efficient.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description fails to explain return values, pagination behavior, or the customer_slug override. The example variables provide some insight, but the tool feels under-documented for a 5-parameter query with nested filters.

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% with generic types, but the description adds a concrete example showing the shape of filter and order, including nested fields like created, groups, roles, and workLocations. This clarifies the intended use of the filter parameter significantly, though it omits the customer_slug parameter from the variable list.

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 states the action 'query identities' with the specific resource, which is clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools by resource name (identities vs users, etc.), though the wording is terse.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or context, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the resource name.

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