metadata_user_get

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 merely states 'Get metadata' without confirming read-only behavior, potential side effects, authentication requirements, or return format. For a metadata-retrieval tool, this lack of detail is a notable gap.

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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. There is no wasted wording, making it appropriately concise for a trivial one-parameter tool.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not clarify what 'metadata' encompasses, how it differs from full user retrieval (users_get), or what the response will contain. Given the large sibling set, an agent may not be able to confidently invoke this 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?

The input schema covers the sole parameter (userId) with a description ('User numeric ID'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('metadata for a specific user'), which conveys the core purpose. However, it does not differentiate from closely related siblings like users_get or metadata_node_get, leaving some ambiguity about what 'metadata' means in contrast to user profiles.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as users_get or metadata_user_upsert. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or conditions that would select this tool over its siblings.

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