filter_agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, how the query matching works (exact, partial, case-sensitivity), or what happens with pagination/sorting. The args list only names parameters without explaining behavior.

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: a one-sentence purpose followed by a minimal argument list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clean and front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Although the tool is simple and an output schema exists, the description lacks usage context and critical behavioral details. It doesn't explain query semantics or distinguish from related tools, making it incomplete for an agent to select and invoke correctly in all situations.

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 no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description's args list adds meaning. It gives an example for 'query' (email, name, department, active status) but the descriptions for 'page' and 'per_page' are generic and provide limited value. This partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 a clear action ('Filter agents') with a specific resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_agents by focusing on filtering, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or scope. The phrase 'by various criteria' is vague but supplemented by the args list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., get_agents, get_agent_by_id). It does not mention any exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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