get_user_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation and the fields returned are listed, but the description does not disclose permissions, error behavior, or whether server membership is required.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, required input, and returned information without any filler. Every part of the sentence earns its place.

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 read tool with a fully documented single parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it says what the tool does, what ID is needed, and what information comes back. It could be stronger by noting how it differs from member/bot lookups.

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 100% for the single 'userId' parameter, so the schema already documents the input fully. The description adds only 'by ID' and returned fields, which does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('profile information about a Discord user'), and key fields returned (avatar, bot status, creation date). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from similar siblings such as get_member_info or get_bot_info.

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?

It states the tool requires a user ID, which implies it is for ID-based lookups, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no alternatives. With many sibling tools available, an agent gets no routing help.

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