Show Project User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by noting that 'For null values, the key won't be returned,' which is a behavioral detail beyond the annotations. There is no contradiction.

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 somewhat cluttered with redundant phrases like '#### OK Response' and repeated mentions of 'Directory records.' It also includes the endpoint and API info which, while informative, could be more concise. Shorter, focused sentences would improve structure.

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 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose and mentions null value behavior. However, it lacks details about the response structure beyond 'JSON object' and could benefit from an example or clarification on pagination (page/per_page params are present but not mentioned).

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, describing all parameters. The description merely repeats that project_id and id are required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 shows details on a specified Project User, with a clear verb ('Show') and resource. It distinguishes from list tools by specifying 'fetch the full details of a specific Directory records by its identifier' and includes the required parameters and endpoint.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Directory records by its identifier,' providing some context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among the many sibling 'show' tools for users (e.g., show_company_user).

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