akb_search_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits like read-only nature, required permissions, or response format. A search tool should at minimum imply read-only, but it's not explicit.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the function, the second provides a use case. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and two parameters (one partially covered), the description is minimal but sufficient for a simple search tool. However, it lacks details like pagination, case sensitivity, or wildcard support, which would be helpful for an agent.

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 50% (only query has a description in schema). The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema for query, and it fails to mention the limit parameter entirely. With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 it searches users by username, display name, or email, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like akb_search (which likely searches vault items) by specifying 'users' and mentioning a use case (granting vault access).

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 includes an explicit use case: 'Use this to find users before granting vault access.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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