retrieve_user

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 covered. The description adds the concrete endpoint path, which is minor useful context, but does not disclose authentication needs, error behavior, or which attributes are returned.

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 short and front-loads the important fact: this gets a specific user by id. It is slightly redundant, since the second sentence largely restates the first and duplicates the title, but the waste is minimal.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves unclear what attributes are returned and whether any permissions are required. It does not need to explain return values if an output schema existed, but none is provided here.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both `userId` and `x-trace-id`. The description only restates that retrieval is by user id and adds no meaning beyond that schema, which is the expected baseline when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource ("Get specific user by id") and reinforces it with the concrete HTTP endpoint. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `retrieve_user_list` by targeting a single user, but offers no explicit sibling differentiation for related tools like `retrieve_user_client` or `retrieve_user_is_password_set`.

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 phrase "by id" implies usage when a user identifier is available, which is a reasonable implied condition. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, prerequisites, or direct the agent to alternatives, leaving usage context largely inferred from the name.

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