linkedin_sn_search_users

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'advanced search' but doesn't describe what that means operationally - no information about rate limits, authentication requirements, result format, pagination, or performance characteristics. The description doesn't explain what 'Sales Navigator filters' means in practice or how results differ from regular LinkedIn searches.

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 a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with comprehensive schema documentation and gets straight to the point about what makes this search 'advanced' (Sales Navigator filters).

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 complex search tool with 20 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or any behavioral aspects. While the schema covers parameters well, the description fails to provide the contextual understanding needed for effective tool selection and use, especially given the absence of output schema.

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 the schema already documents all 20 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. It mentions 'Sales Navigator filters' which hints at the parameter categories, but provides no additional syntax, format, or usage guidance beyond the comprehensive schema descriptions.

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 verb ('search') and resource ('LinkedIn users') with the specific context of 'using Sales Navigator filters'. It distinguishes from generic LinkedIn user tools by specifying the advanced Sales Navigator filtering capability. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'search_linkedin_users' sibling tool, which appears to be a more general 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention the sibling 'search_linkedin_users' tool or explain when Sales Navigator filters are appropriate versus basic LinkedIn searches. There's no discussion of prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases for this advanced search functionality.

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