search_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. However, the description adds no behavioral details beyond the schema: e.g., pagination behavior, case sensitivity, or partial matching is not mentioned.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose. Could benefit from an additional sentence on usage, but remains concise.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (which covers return values), the description adequately states the basic purpose. However, for a search tool with two parameters, it omits detail on the limit parameter and query format. Minimum viable but not fully complete.

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?

Schemal description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions searching by name or email, which partly explains the 'query' parameter, but does not explain the 'limit' parameter or its default value. Incomplete compensation for low coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it searches Zendesk users by name or email. This specifies the resource and action, distinguishing it from siblings like search_tickets (tickets) and get_user (specific user lookup).

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?

Implied that it is used for finding users by name or email, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No mention of alternatives like get_user for known IDs.

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