zid_search_users

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with '(read-only)'. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits) are disclosed, but the annotation covers the core safety aspect.

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 very concise at one sentence, but it could include more useful information (e.g., matching behavior) without becoming verbose. It is not overly long, but the brevity sacrifices some helpful context.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are documented, but the description still misses usage guidance and behavioral context like pagination limits or when to prefer this over list/get. It feels incomplete for a search tool with multiple sibling alternatives.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. It offers no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for good schema 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches ZIdentity users and indicates it is read-only. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zid_list_users (listing) and zid_get_user (specific user), though it does not specify the matching behavior (e.g., partial, case-insensitive).

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 search tool versus alternatives like zid_list_users or zid_get_user. The description lacks context about when searching is appropriate compared to listing all users or retrieving a specific user.

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