gitlab_users_search

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, and the description adds the useful context that results exist to bridge to numeric ids. It says nothing about result volume, matching behavior (substring vs exact, per the schema), or ordering beyond what the schema and output schema already provide.

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 short sentences, the purpose front-loaded before the rationale. The '11.3' reference is terse and assumes internal context, which costs a little clarity but no wasted prose.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the schema covers all three parameters plus pagination. The only gap is the absence of explicit guidance on when this beats other lookups, which is minor for a simple read tool.

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%, so 'search', 'page' and 'perPage' are fully documented in the schema itself. The description's 'by name or username' loosely maps to the search parameter but adds no syntax or format detail beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find users by name or username') and explains why it exists relative to the id-based filtering elsewhere. It does not name a sibling alternative, but no sibling tool overlaps with user lookup, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 rationale ('11.3 assigns and filters by numeric user id and never by username') implies when to reach for this tool — resolving a username to an id — but it is stated as a justification rather than explicit usage guidance. There is no when-not condition and no named alternative such as gitlab_whoami for the current user.

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