cigchat_search_subscribers

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

The description discloses a concrete behavioral requirement: 'Requires the "Manage Flow" scope on the token' and indicates a read operation via 'Get list'. With no annotations, the description carries the burden but omits details like pagination behavior, response format, or rate limits, though the schema hints at page/limit parameters.

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 concise, with the main action first and the scope requirement appended in a second sentence. The typo 'seaching' and vague 'and so on' are minor issues, but overall 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?

With 17 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context. It does not explain how multiple filters combine, pagination defaults, or what the response structure looks like, making it incomplete for a tool of this 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists a few example search fields (name, phone, email, tag, custom user field) but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides; 'and so on' is vague and not helpful.

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 states 'Get list of subscribers by searching for name, phone, email, tag, custom user field and so on' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_subscriber or broadcast_to_list by emphasizing search/filter, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_subscriber for a single subscriber). The description only mentions the endpoint and scope requirement, but does not explain selection criteria or exclusions.

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