get_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Fetch a single user.' It does not mention authentication requirements, behavior on multiple matches, whether all parameters are mutually exclusive, or what the response looks like. Minimal behavioral insight is given.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any filler. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it does not explain error handling (e.g., user not found), behavior when multiple identifiers are given, or whether any identifier is preferred. It covers the basic call pattern but lacks richer context that an agent might need for edge cases.

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 coverage is only 33% (only user_id has a description). The description adds meaning by explicitly naming the three identifier fields (sys_id, username, email), which compensates for the missing schema descriptions. However, it does not clarify whether parameters can be combined, precedence, or requiredness, so it only partially compensates.

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 action (Fetch), a clear resource (single user), and the three identification methods (sys_id, username, email). This unambiguously distinguishes it from list_users and other user-related tools.

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 clearly implies it is for retrieving a single user, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is clear enough for an agent to select it when a single user is needed, though no exclusions are provided.

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