search_organization_members

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (implied by 'nextToken' and 'page'/'perPage' parameters), rate limits, authentication needs, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a search tool with 9 parameters.

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 concise with a single sentence and no wasted words. However, it lacks front-loading of critical details (e.g., search capabilities, pagination) and could be more structured to highlight key aspects, though it remains efficient.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the search functionality, result format, pagination behavior, or error handling. For a tool with rich input options, this minimal description does not provide enough context for effective use.

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 the schema fully documents all 9 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or search logic. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 the action ('Search for') and resource ('organization members'), which is clear but minimal. It lacks specificity about what 'search' entails (e.g., filtering, pagination) and does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'list_organization_members' or 'get_organization_member_info', leaving the purpose somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention sibling tools like 'list_organization_members' or 'get_organization_member_info', nor does it explain prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases, offering no help for selection.

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