db_user_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses no read-only nature, side effects, error behavior, authentication needs, or response shape. 'One database user.' says nothing about what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 text is short and has a clear Args label, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. The main sentence contributes little meaning and could describe almost any database-user operation.

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?

Even though an output schema is present, the description lacks the behavioral and usage context needed to call this tool correctly. It provides only the resource concept and one parameter, leaving the agent without enough information to understand the operation's scope or side effects.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only repeats that 'dbuser' is a DB username, which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name. It does not explain expected format, uniqueness, or how the value is used in the operation.

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 'One database user.' is a noun phrase, not an action statement. It does not explicitly say the tool retrieves or returns a database user, so an agent must infer the verb from the tool name. It weakly distinguishes from plural database-user tools, but the purpose is vague.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like db_users, db_get, or db_create_user. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided, so the agent receives no help in selecting among the many sibling database tools.

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