gitea_search_users

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose search behavior (fuzzy vs exact), pagination, rate limits, or what fields are searched by the 'q' parameter. No mention of authentication requirements for the 'site' parameter.

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?

Single sentence is appropriately brief, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is structural noise that should be removed. Given the lack of schema documentation, the description is actually too concise.

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?

Inadequate for a 3-parameter search tool with zero schema descriptions and no output schema. Missing critical context: what 'site' refers to, what the query searches (username, email?), and return value structure.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description must compensate but only partially does. It maps 'q' and 'uid' to 'query' and 'user ID' abstractly, but completely omits the required 'site' parameter (likely the Gitea instance URL) and doesn't explain parameter formats or mutual exclusivity.

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 specific verb (search) and resource (Gitea users), distinguishing it from sibling 'gitea_get_user'. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata leakage that reduces clarity.

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?

Implicitly suggests two search modes (query or user ID) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'gitea_get_user' or which parameter takes precedence if both are provided.

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