get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read, but there is no disclosure of auth requirements, rate limits, privacy behavior, or error handling. The key example is parameter detail, not behavioral 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?

A single sentence front-loads the verb and resource, followed by a useful example. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter read, the description is nearly sufficient for invocation. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits auth/scope details and fails to distinguish itself from sibling 'me', leaving meaningful contextual gaps.

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 coverage is 0% and the lone parameter is named 'Key' with no schema description. The description adds only an example '/spartacus/', which helps with format but does not define what the key represents or acceptable variants. Partial compensation for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: get a user profile by key. The example key '/spartacus/' clarifies the target format. It does not distinguish from sibling 'me' or explain the user scope, but the core purpose is clear.

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?

No when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. 'By key' implies lookup, but the sibling 'me' creates ambiguity about current user vs. arbitrary user that the description does not resolve.

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