get_user_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned attribute categories, which is useful, but says nothing about authentication requirements, whether it returns the calling user or a resolved user, or how missing/unavailable fields are represented.

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 with a colon-delimited field list; every token carries information and nothing is repeated from the name or annotations.

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?

With no input parameters and no output schema, the description's enumeration of returned attributes is exactly the compensating detail an agent needs. The remaining gap is that it never states whose user record is fetched, which matters for a zero-arg tool in a portfolio/accounting API.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument call, and there is nothing for it to disambiguate beyond that.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Get user information') with an enumerated list of what the payload contains (tariff, qualified investor status, premium status, risk level), which is more specific than the bare name. However it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like get_accounts, get_margin_attributes, or get_portfolio, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone where user attributes end and account attributes begin.

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 statement of when to call this tool, whose user it returns (current caller vs. arbitrary user), or when a sibling such as get_accounts or get_margin_attributes would be the better choice. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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