get_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Look up' implies a read-only retrieval, but the description does not state permissions, error behavior for unknown users or emails, ambiguity handling, or rate limits, so it gives only minimum viable context for a simple read.

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 definition is front-loaded with the lookup purpose and followed by a short Args block. It is compact, has no filler, and the identifier-format hints earn their 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?

This is a simple two-parameter lookup and an output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation. The description covers both inputs and their formats, but it leaves a small gap by not explaining how to obtain valid workspace names or when this tool should be chosen over related alternatives.

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 explains both required parameters, including that workspace is a configured workspace name and user is a U…/W… ID or email address. It could be slightly more precise about where workspace names come from, but it substantially covers the accepted input formats.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Look up a user' by Slack ID or email. It is clearly a single-user lookup, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as check_access or list_workspaces.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use or when-not guidance and names no alternatives. An agent can infer that it retrieves a user, but it must guess when this is preferable to other user-related or access-checking tools.

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