ghl_get_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get a single team member' and offers no information about error handling, return format, required permissions, or any side effects. For a simple read operation this is minimal, but it lacks context such as what is returned if the user is not found.

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 front-loads the purpose and key parameter. There is no unnecessary wording or redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool is simple, with one parameter and a straightforward purpose. The description accurately conveys that it retrieves a single user by ID, which is sufficient for a get-by-id operation. Although there is no output schema or detailed return description, the context is adequately complete for a tool of this simplicity.

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 schema already provides full coverage for the single parameter (userId with description 'User ID'). The description reiterates this by saying 'by their user ID' but adds no extra semantic meaning (e.g., ID format, uniqueness constraints). Thus the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb 'Get', the resource 'a single team member', and the key scoping parameter 'by their user ID'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_get_users (plural) and ghl_search_users, as it explicitly retrieves one entity by a unique identifier.

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 their user ID' provides clear context that this tool is for fetching a specific user when the ID is known. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use ghl_get_users or ghl_search_users as alternatives, which would fully clarify usage boundaries.

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