Search users

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. Description adds that search is by name-or-email fragment and that results are used to obtain ids, but doesn't disclose return format, multiple results, or pagination.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the use case. No filler.

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 single-required-param read-only search with full schema coverage, the description gives the agent enough to choose and call it correctly. It identifies what the id is needed for, and while no output schema exists, the resolve-to-id clue covers the essential return use.

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 covers 100% of parameters and already describes 'query' as a name or email fragment. Description reinforces this by saying 'Finds users by name or email' and ties it to resolving ids, but adds no format or behavioral detail beyond the schema.

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 ('Finds') and resource ('users') and specifies matching by name or email. It differentiates itself from list_users/get_user by describing the intended resolve-to-id use case.

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?

Directly instructs when to use: resolve a person to an id expected by list_pages and group tools. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended context is clear from the description.

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