Get user

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses routing logic (ID-shaped vs email input), exact percent-encoded email lookup, no partial matching, includeRole caveats, permission requirements, and redaction-protected returns. This thoroughly covers behavioral nuances.

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?

Three dense sentences, each earning its place. The description is front-loaded with the core action and immediately provides needed context on routing, alternatives, permissions, and safety. No filler.

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 get-by-identifier tool, the description comprehensively covers input handling, alternative tools, permissions, and output characteristics. The presence of an output schema reduces the burden of explaining return values, and the description works well with the structured metadata.

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?

While the schema covers 100% of parameters, the description adds meaningful semantics: how userIdOrEmail is routed based on input shape, the percent-encoding requirement, and the behavior of includeRole. This goes beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

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 verb (Get), resource (user), and qualifiers (by stable ID or exact email). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like n8n_users_list by explicitly noting that n8n_users_list is for discovery, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance (by ID/email) and directs users to n8n_users_list for discovery, which is a clear alternative. It also notes the required user-read permission, adding practical usage context.

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