get_user_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on auth requirements, scope of the returned user, or sourcing — so it contributes no behavioral value.

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?

It is a single three-word phrase with no filler, so nothing is wasted, but it is also so minimal that it functions as a label rather than a specification. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and full annotation coverage, the structural burden on the description is modest — yet the one thing that matters, whose user info is returned, is left entirely ambiguous. For a tool sitting among dozens of sibling get_* calls, that omission leaves the definition incomplete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify about arguments; the only residual gap is what 'user' implicitly refers to, which the schema cannot express.

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?

"Get User Info" merely restates the tool name and title; it names no distinguishing scope or resource beyond the obvious. It gives no hint whether this returns the authenticated user, a workspace member, or something else, so it cannot be told apart from siblings like get_user_subscription_info or get_workspace_members.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance at all. The agent receives no signal about which user is fetched or when this is preferable to the many other get_* tools nearby.

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