get_confluence_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the tool returns user profile information and implies a read-only lookup, but it does not disclose behavior for unknown users, handling of multiple provided identifiers, or any auth/error specifics.

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?

Two tight sentences with no fluff: the first states the operation and return value, the second provides the key usage condition. The guidance is front-loaded and every sentence earns its 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?

The description is adequate for a simple lookup tool but leaves some gaps: it does not clarify how to proceed if multiple identifiers are provided, what happens if no identifier is provided, or what the returned profile structure looks like. With no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context would improve completeness.

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 100%, so the schema already documents email, username, and accountId fully. The description adds the unifying concept of 'unique identifier' but provides no additional syntax, precedence rules, or guidance on whether exactly one parameter should be supplied.

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 details), the resource (a specific Confluence user), and the locating mechanism (unique identifier like username, account ID, or email). This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_confluence_current_user and find_confluence_users, even without naming them.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use this tool when confident the user can be uniquely identified. It does not name an alternative such as find_confluence_users for ambiguous lookups, but the condition is clear and actionable.

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