user_invitation_search_by_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits like side effects, authentication needs, or error conditions. The misleading 'Required' statement further undermines transparency.

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 but not well-structured. It leads with HTTP method and path, which is less useful than the purpose. However, it is concise and does not contain unnecessary words.

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 the tool has 9 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain the return format, how to construct queries, or what 'by connection' means. The tool cannot be used effectively with this description.

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?

While the input schema has 100% description coverage, the description adds confusion by incorrectly labeling some parameters as required. This makes it less helpful than the schema alone and does not add meaningful semantic context.

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 says 'Get object by connection' which is vague and does not clearly specify the tool's purpose. It also incorrectly lists 'from, size, q' as required when the schema shows them as optional. No differentiation from sibling tools like user_invitation_search.

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 versus alternatives such as user_invitation_search. The description does not provide any context about the intended use case or prerequisites.

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