Jira: Search Users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the API endpoint and that it returns accountId, but does not disclose other behaviors like query matching behavior, pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The schema covers parameters, so the description adds minimal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and use case, and every sentence earns its place.

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 the simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is adequate but could be improved by mentioning the output format (e.g., list of users with accountId and displayName). It does cover the key return value (accountId) and the use case.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema for the parameters. It does not elaborate on the query format beyond what is in the schema description.

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 tool searches users and returns accountId, and provides a specific use case (mapping email/displayName to accountId for user picker fields). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'jira_resolve_user_account_id' which likely operates on a known accountId.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to map email/displayName → accountId for user picker fields', providing a clear when-to-use scenario. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the context of siblings and the specific use case give enough guidance.

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