Maigret username search

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety burden is largely covered. The description adds useful context by mentioning it extracts profile data and filters false positives, but it does not disclose rate limits, network behavior, or output size.

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 two focused sentences with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and the output behavior is stated efficiently.

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 tool with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable high-level view of purpose, scope, and output. However, it lacks guidance on choosing it over sherlock_username_search and doesn't fully describe the expected return format, so it isn't fully self-sufficient for an agent.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of extra meaning, like '3000+' sites with all_sites, but the parameters are already well documented in the schema and the description does not add essential semantic detail beyond that.

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 specific action ('Search a username') and resource (Maigret), with clear scope details ('500 most popular sites by default, 3000+ with all_sites'). It also says what the tool extracts and that it filters false positives, but it does not differentiate it from the sibling sherlock_username_search, which is also username-focused.

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 guidance on when to choose this tool over sherlock_username_search or when not to use it. The coverage details imply broad username enumeration, but the description doesn't provide selection criteria, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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