Users: get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by disclosing the shape of the returned record (name, email, role, invitation status, creation date). It does not mention error behavior for an unknown ID, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 sentences, no waste, with the core action front-loaded and the routing guidance immediately after. Every clause carries information.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by listing the fields returned. For a one-parameter read tool with a full annotation profile, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already tells the agent to find the ID via users_list. The description adds only 'by ID', so the baseline of 3 for schema-covered parameters is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a user by ID') and enumerates the returned fields (name, email, role, invitation confirmation, creation date). It also names the siblings it is not, so an agent can distinguish it from users_list and roles_permissions_list without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this to check one person's role, use `users_list` to scan everyone, and `roles_permissions_list` to see what a role allows. Both the when-to-use and the alternatives are named.

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