get_user_active_status_by_id_api_v1_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states 'Get User Active Status By Id'. It does not disclose what 'active status' means (e.g., boolean, enum), error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. The behavioral insight is minimal.

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 short sentence that directly mirrors the tool name, making it concise but lacking substance. It is front-loaded but does not earn its place by providing additional value beyond the name.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. However, for a simple retrieval tool with one parameter, the description is insufficient to fully understand its role among many sibling tools. It meets the minimum but has room for improvement.

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 sole parameter 'user_id' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the description does not add any context about its format, purpose, or constraints. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description does not elaborate.

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 clearly states the action (get) and resource (user active status) and specifies the identifier (by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like get_user_by_id and get_user_info_by_id by focusing on 'active status'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_user_status_by_session_user or other user-related tools. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.

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