jira_search_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the return of accountId, which is useful, but does not mention pagination, permissions, or any limitations. The read-only nature of 'search' is implicit but not stated explicitly.

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 with a clear purpose: the first states the action and criteria, the second states the output and use case. There is no redundant or filler content.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the key return value (accountId) and a high-level use case. It does not describe the full result structure, but for a simple search tool it is sufficient. Missing details like pagination behavior are not critical for the agent's decision to use the tool.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (query and maxResults) with clear descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' with resource 'JIRA users' and lists searchable attributes (name, email, display name). It distinguishes this tool from siblings, as no other sibling tool performs user 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?

The description clearly implies when to use the tool (when a user lookup is needed) and explains that the returned accountId can be used for mentions or assignments, giving a concrete use case. It does not explicitly mention exclusions, but no sibling tool overlaps, so this is acceptable.

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