search_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (cursor from previous next_cursor) and count constraints (default 20, max 100), but does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or search behavior like case sensitivity or matching logic.

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 extremely concise, with a single-sentence purpose followed by a bullet list of argument explanations. Every sentence is informative and there is no redundancy or unnecessary information.

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 that an output schema exists (context indicates 'Has output schema: true'), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it misses the scope of what fields are searched (e.g., username, display name) and does not mention error conditions or behavior when no results are found. This is adequate but not 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?

The description adds meaningful context beyond the input schema: it explains that cursor comes from a previous response's next_cursor, and specifies the default and maximum for count. The schema only provides types and defaults, so this adds value for the agent.

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 clearly states 'Search for users by query (paginated)', specifying the verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_user_info (which requires a specific user) and search_community (which searches communities). However, it does not specify which user attributes are searched (e.g., username, display name), which could provide more clarity.

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?

The description implies usage when needing to find users by a query string, but does not explicitly contrast with other user-related tools such as get_user_info or follow_user. There is no guidance on when not to use this tool or mention of prerequisites.

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