get_user_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It transparently identifies the operation as retrieval of authenticated-user information and lists the meaningful fields returned. It could explicitly state that no data is modified, but the resource and wording make the read-only nature strongly implied.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose and result fields; the second provides the practical triggering condition. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only info lookup, this description is complete: it names the resource, the fields returned, and the user-facing scenario in which it should be used. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by listing the expected information.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter details and instead clarifies what data the caller will receive, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses a specific verb ('Obtiene') with a clear resource ('información del usuario autenticado') and enumerates the returned fields: nombre, email, estado de la cuenta. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling tools, which all deal with certificates, businesses, documents, or purchases rather than the authenticated user.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: when the client asks about their personal data or account. While it does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, the context is clear enough for a zero-parameter, user-specific lookup.

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