slack_users_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds value by specifying case-insensitive partial match and the exact fields searched (name, display name, email). No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence with no waste. Efficiently conveys key information.

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 low complexity (two parameters, one required) and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, behavior, and input fields. However, it omits details about output structure or pagination behavior (e.g., limit parameter behavior).

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% and schema descriptions are thorough. Description's mention of searchable fields largely overlaps with schema description. Adds minimal new information beyond what schema already provides.

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?

Clearly states it searches workspace users by specific fields (name, display name, email) and describes the match behavior (case-insensitive partial match). Distinguishes from siblings like slack_list_users and slack_users_info.

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?

Clear context that this tool is for searching users by query, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Implicit from sibling names but not explicit.

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