superset_user_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' and adds the dependency note about user_list, but it does not state permissions required, behavior for invalid IDs, or whether any side effects occur. This is minimally adequate but lacks deeper transparency.

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 concise and well-structured, starting with a clear purpose, followed by an important usage note, and a compact Args section. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant information or padding.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. The prerequisite to call superset_user_list for unknown IDs is valuable contextual completeness, though it avoids discussing not-found errors or permission issues, which would have made it 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?

The input schema provides no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description compensates by explaining user_id as 'User ID (integer from user_list result).' This adds meaning by specifying data type and origin, though it stops short of detailing constraints like required existence or validation behavior.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a user by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like superset_user_list (which likely returns all users) and superset_get_current_user (which targets the current user). The inclusion of 'by ID' makes the scope unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs calling superset_user_list first when the ID is unknown, providing a clear prerequisite and alternative workflow. However, it does not mention when to use alternative getter tools (e.g., superset_get_current_user) or when not to use this tool, leaving some gaps in full alternatives guidance.

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