Search Users

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

Annotations flag readOnlyHint=false but destructiveHint=false; the description reconciles that tension by stating read-like POSTs don't publish to social platforms, and adds two traits not in the annotations: paid credit consumption and the confirm=true gate. Remaining gaps are minor (no rate-limit or pagination detail).

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose followed by usage context and then the cost/confirm constraint. With no output schema, the field enumeration earns its place rather than being 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 3-param search tool with no output schema, the description covers return shape, intended usage, credit cost, and the confirm flag. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 all three parameters (query, account, confirm) are already documented in the schema, including the credential-vs-remote-account nuance of 'account'. The description only restates the confirm requirement without adding format or syntax detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('Searches for Threads users by username') and enumerates the returned fields, distinguishing it from the domain's keyword search sibling (threads_search_by_keyword). An agent can tell what it does without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear workflow context ('finding user accounts before fetching their profile or posts'), which tells the agent when this is the right starting point. It stops short of naming the alternative (threads_search_by_keyword) or stating when-not-to-use, so no explicit routing.

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