get_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states that it returns profile information, but does not disclose permissions, error behavior (e.g., if ID not found), or that it is read-only. This is a modest gap for a read tool.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Returns profile information') and the key scope ('for a specific user by their ID'). 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?

The tool is simple (1 param), but without an output schema, the description only vaguely promises 'profile information', leaving the return structure unspecified. It does not cover potential error cases or permission requirements, which an agent might need for full confidence.

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 already documents user_id with a description, and context signals indicate 100% schema coverage. The description's phrase 'by their ID' adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'returns' and identifies the resource as 'profile information for a specific user', with the scope 'by their ID'. This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_me (current user) and get_all_company_members (all members).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_me or list_company_members. It implicitly suggests usage when a specific user ID is known, but there is no when/when-not language or mention of alternative tools.

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