nexus_search_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: it notes the v2 GraphQL backend avoids v1 REST rate-limit quota, and provides pagination guidance ('Paginate with offset += _returned') and return structure. This goes beyond the annotation hints, but doesn't cover error behavior.

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 brief and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a clear differentiator, and a return format block. No wasted words; essential details are 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 search tool with 6 parameters and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the purpose, differentiator, return format, and pagination. It doesn't address edge cases like empty results or error handling, but those are minor for a read-only search operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal additional meaning—it mentions partial names which relates to the mode enum, and explains pagination usage but not new per-parameter semantics. This aligns with the baseline of 3 for high coverage.

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: 'Search Nexus Mods users by username'. It specifies the verb (Search), resource (users), and parameter (username). It also distinguishes itself from sibling nexus_get_user_v2 by noting partial name support, which helps an agent differentiate.

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 explicitly contrasts with nexus_get_user_v2 ('Unlike nexus_get_user_v2 this supports partial names'), giving a clear condition for preferred use. It also mentions the API version and rate-limit advantage. However, it does not list when not to use it or mention other alternatives like nexus_get_user_by_name, so it's not fully explicit.

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