rybbit_get_user_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get' which implies read-only, but does not disclose required permissions, error behavior, return format, or any constraints. The mention of 'profile traits and linked devices' gives some clue about the response but lacks depth.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that is concise and free of fluff. It efficiently communicates the core purpose in a well-structured manner.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves gaps. It does not describe the full return value shape beyond 'profile traits and linked devices', nor does it provide usage context or prerequisites. However, the tool's simplicity lessens the need for extensive detail.

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 the baseline is 3. The parameter descriptions ('Site ID or identifier', 'User identifier') are minimal and add little beyond the parameter names. The tool description does not elaborate on how these parameters affect the query, so it fails to add meaningful semantic value beyond the 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('detailed user information'), and adds scope ('including profile traits and linked devices'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by its focus on profile traits and devices, though it does not explicitly say 'single user' to differentiate from rybbit_get_users.

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 like rybbit_get_users or rybbit_get_user_sessions. It only describes what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and parameters.

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