Search people

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world. The description adds real behavioral value beyond them: no-credit/free cost, the no-contact-data limitation, opaque cursor pagination, and that each person carries an apollo id. It stops short of stating rate limits or result shape.

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?

Compact set of sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then cost, limitation, constraint, pagination, and the enrichment pointer. Every sentence carries a distinct, actionable fact.

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 9-param search tool with no output schema, it covers cost, coverage limits, pagination, and the filter constraint. Return-field detail is (correctly) delegated to apollo ids and the enrichment sibling, though result shape isn't described.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters with constraints. The description adds only the cross-parameter rule (at least one filter) and the cursor round-trip contract, which is modest beyond the schema baseline of 3.

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+resource (search people/prospects) and enumerates the filterable dimensions. It clearly distinguishes itself from sdr_search_companies and sdr_waterfall_enrich_person.

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?

Explicit when-to-use and hand-off: 'Does NOT return emails or phones — use sdr_waterfall_enrich_person on the people you want' and 'Use sdr_lookup_filters first'. It states the 'Requires at least one filter' constraint, routing the agent precisely.

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