npm_user_packages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the authentication requirement, which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose pagination, error behavior, or rate limits, so it adds only moderate value.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundant wording. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating what the tool does, what it returns, and its authentication requirement.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with good annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, output, and auth requirement. It doesn't mention edge cases like nonexistent users or pagination, but these are not critical for basic invocation. Slight deduction for lacking any mention of access-level semantics.

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% with a single parameter 'username' described as 'npm username.' The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already provides sufficient clarity. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource: 'packages published by a specific npm user.' It also states what is shown (package names and access level). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like npm_org_packages or npm_team_packages, so it falls short of a 5.

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 mentions 'Requires authentication' but does not state preconditions, exclusions, or alternative tools. The intended usage is only implied by the purpose.

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