x_search_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses only the return fields. It says nothing about authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or whether results are cached/curated versus a live query — all relevant for a search crawler over third-party accounts.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action and the payload with no filler. It is efficient, though it sacrifices coverage for brevity rather than balancing the two.

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?

There is no output schema, so listing the returned fields is genuinely useful. However, for a limited search tool the description omits any note on result ordering, pagination, or the 20-item cap's implications, leaving the agent with only a minimal picture.

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 both the query and the 1-20 limit bound are already documented, and the description adds no syntax, format, or operator guidance beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives a specific verb (Search) and resource (X profiles) and even enumerates the returned fields (display names, handles, bios, URLs), which separates it from extraction-oriented siblings like x_extract_profile and x_get_accounts. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus x_search_posts, x_extract_profile, or x_get_accounts, and no prerequisite or exclusion guidance. The word 'Search' implies discovery semantics but the agent must infer the routing itself.

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