forcepoint_user_get

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only', which conveys the safe, non-mutating nature of the operation. However, no annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behaviors such as error handling, permissions, or output format, leaving those aspects unclear.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the action and resource. Every word adds value, with no redundant or filler content.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not mention what the returned user details contain, how to choose between userId and username, or any constraints (e.g., username email format), leaving significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0% and the description does not mention any of the three parameters (userId, username, apiVersion). It does not explain the distinction between userId and username, nor how apiVersion affects the request or response, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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 reads Forcepoint user details, specifying the API versions (v2 or v2.1). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that create, update, or delete users, as well as token-related operations.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any exclusions or alternative tools for related operations like token retrieval, even though sibling tools exist for those purposes.

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