get_user_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (non-destructive) and openWorldHint=true (variable results). Description adds behavior beyond annotations: mentions rate limiting and authentication sensitivity, which are useful for agent decision-making.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose, then provide usage guidelines and behavioral notes. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 4 parameters with 100% schema coverage, presence of output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description is fully adequate. It covers purpose, alternatives, authentication behavior, and rate limiting, leaving no gaps for agent comprehension.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides; it mentions authentication context but does not elaborate on parameter usage or dependencies beyond schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('comprehensive user information'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_user_profile and get_author_feed by stating it combines profile, recent posts, and engagement statistics in one call.

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 states when to use ('when you need both in one round-trip'), when not to use (alternatives get_user_profile and get_author_feed), and authentication context ('Works without authentication; richer with auth').

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