run_poshmark_users_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the pricing behavior (1 point per returned record), which is a real behavioral trait not in the schema. It omits pagination behavior, result caps relative to max_items, and whether misses still cost points.

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, purpose front-loaded and the cost note appended with no filler. Efficient, though the cost sentence could be folded into a clearer usage line rather than standing alone.

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?

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema search tool this covers the essentials—what it searches, what the query matches, and the cost model. It still lacks sibling routing and any hint about the shape or volume of results, leaving the agent to infer.

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 params are already documented and baseline is 3. The parenthetical clarifying that query matches username, name, avatar, and home region adds marginal meaning over the schema's 'Name or handle' example but does not explain domain or paging semantics further.

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 (search Poshmark closets) plus the matchable fields (username, name, avatar, home region), which is more than a name restatement. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling run_poshmark_users, which an agent would need to route between.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of the alternative run_poshmark_users for looking up a single known user. The only routing aid is the cost line, which hints at bulk search but doesn't set conditions.

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