user_info_v2

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the OAuth token requirement and lack of required params, but does not describe the response format, error behavior, or explicitly confirm read-only semantics beyond the GET verb. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise, front-loads the endpoint and HTTP method, and wastes no words. It includes essential auth and guidance pointers in a compact format.

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 tool with no output schema, the description fails to explain what the user info response contains (e.g., fields, scope). It points to an external resource for full instructions rather than being self-contained, leaving the agent guessing about the return value.

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 input schema already describes all 5 parameters with full coverage, including the oauthToken env-var fallback. The description adds 'no additional required parameters' and the env-var alternative, but this largely duplicates schema information, so it neither enhances nor detracts.

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 '[GET] /user/info/v2 - User Info', identifying the endpoint and HTTP method, but 'User Info' is vague and restates the tool name without detailing what specific information is returned or for which user. It distinguishes from siblings only by the path.

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 notes that no required parameters are needed and that an OAuth token is required, providing some context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., profiles_link vs user_info) or any exclusions.

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