get_scale_users

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'discovered' usefully signals that this reads previously discovered account data rather than performing a live fetch, but it never explicitly states read-only behavior, whether it can trigger discovery, or how an empty account is reported.

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 no filler. The resource being returned is named up front, so an agent scanning the text gets the payload immediately.

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 zero-param lookup this is close to sufficient, but 'table mappings' is left unexplained (which tables, what the mapping keys are), and there is no output schema to fall back on. A short clause on the returned shape and the sync dependency would close the gap.

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 there is nothing for the description to compensate for; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly signals that the selection scope is the whole account rather than a caller-supplied filter.

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?

Specific verb 'Get' plus a concrete resource: linked Renpho scale-user IDs and their table mappings. It is distinguishable from measurement-oriented siblings like get_body_composition or get_latest_measurement, but it never says how it differs from the near neighbors get_current_user and get_sync_diagnostics.

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 versus alternatives, no prerequisite (e.g. that a sync/refresh must have run first), and no note about what to do if no scale users are linked. Usage must be inferred from the name alone.

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