get_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does declare 'Read-only' plus enumerates returned fields, which is genuine context. It omits any permission/visibility requirements (e.g., whether admin scope is needed to see other users) and says nothing about the response envelope beyond the field list.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by return fields, ID sourcing, and a related-tool pointer. The enumerated field list is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but the overall structure is efficient and scannable.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description still covers purpose, the single required parameter's origin, and a cross-reference to a related tool. Only the absence of auth/permission context for reading other users keeps it from being fully complete.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by explaining how to derive user_id via list_users. It still doesn't clarify the ID's format/namespace, but the sourcing guidance goes beyond the bare 'Greenhouse user ID' schema text.

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 Greenhouse user's profile by ID') and scopes it to a single user, distinguishing it from siblings like list_users, get_current_user, and list_user_roles. An agent can tell exactly what it returns and for whom.

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 tells the agent how to obtain the required user_id (list_users → match by name or email) and redirects to list_job_permissions for job-level access. It does not, however, contrast with get_current_user, which is a plausible alternative when the caller wants their own profile.

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