search_people

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it usefully discloses the auth requirement (logged-in session) and how credentials resolve via ~/.facebook-mcp/accounts/<account>/ with a configured default. Beyond that it says nothing about result volume, pagination, or rate limits, so disclosure is partial.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then prerequisites and the optional account detail. Nothing is wasted, though the long filesystem path could be trimmed for readability.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Purpose, auth prerequisite, and account selection are covered; the only gap is the undocumented 'limit' parameter and any result-count behavior, which is minor for this tool's complexity.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description does compensate for 'account' by explaining its credential-directory semantics and default, and it illustrates 'q' with an example, but 'limit' is entirely unaddressed despite its default of 10.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search Facebook people by keyword') and reinforces it with a concrete query example. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_pages, but never names that alternative to remove the ambiguity between searching people vs pages.

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?

Usage context is implied by the resource ('Search Facebook people') and a prerequisite is stated ('Requires a logged-in session'), but there is no explicit statement of when to choose this over search_pages or the get_user_* siblings, and no exclusions.

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