Search User Profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what data is retrieved but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a read operation tool, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior beyond the basic purpose.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary details. It could be slightly improved by structuring usage hints, but it avoids redundancy and waste, making it appropriately concise for its content.

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 complexity of retrieving user data with no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like authentication needs, data freshness, or what 'contribution patterns' entail, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 description adds no specific meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It doesn't explain what 'includeRecentItems' does or provide context for the 'username' parameter. However, with only 2 parameters and one being optional with a default, the baseline is 3 as the schema provides minimal but adequate structure.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Get') and resources ('HackerNews user's profile, activity, statistics, and contribution patterns'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_post' or 'search_comments', which might also retrieve user-related data indirectly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'search_posts' or 'search_comments', leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone.

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