Get User

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond 'Get details,' such as whether the response is a full user object or a subset, or any failure/valid-until conditions. It is consistent with the annotations, so no contradiction, but it adds no extra context.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb, resource, and parameter with zero filler. It is efficient and easy to parse.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety, this is largely complete: an agent can call it with a numeric user_id. It lacks any clarification of what 'details' includes and how it differs from get_profile, but the minimal scope keeps the gap small. Given no output schema, a sentence about the returned shape would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so user_id is fully documented as 'The Canvas user ID.' The description's 'by ID' reinforces this without adding new meaning, warranting the baseline score.

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 identifies the operation ('Get details'), the resource ('a single user'), and the selection mechanism ('by ID'). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish get_user from related siblings like get_profile or search_users, so differentiation relies on the tool name and schema rather than the description.

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 such as search_users, get_profile, list_course_users, or list_students. There are no exclusions or contextual conditions, so an agent receives no routing help.

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