search_linkedin_people

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Search for people on LinkedIn' and does not mention result format, pagination behavior, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what distinguishes a search result from a profile object.

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 very short and front-loaded, with no filler. However, it is perhaps too terse to fully support tool selection and invocation, though that is more a completeness issue than a conciseness issue.

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, no annotations, and only a one-sentence description, the definition leaves significant gaps: what the search results look like, how pagination works, whether results are sorted, and how this tool relates to the other LinkedIn tools. The simple parameter list is documented, but the surrounding operational context is lacking.

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%, with both 'keywords' and 'limit' documented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable per the baseline. It does not clarify how keywords are matched or how limit interacts with default behavior beyond the schema's mention.

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 a clear action ('Search') and resource ('people on LinkedIn'), which is enough to identify the core function. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_linkedin_connections, but the verb 'search' suggests a broader discovery operation rather than retrieving an existing list.

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 about when to use this tool versus siblings such as get_linkedin_profile or get_linkedin_connections. There are no exclusions, alternative conditions, or examples that would help an agent choose between search and direct retrieval.

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