remnawave_metadata_get_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states '(read)', implying non-destructiveness, but omits details like authentication needs, error handling, or what happens if the user does not exist.

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 extremely short (one sentence) and front-loaded with the tool's name and read nature. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for conciseness, leaving critical gaps.

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 the lack of annotations, output schema, and 4 parameters with nested objects and enums, the description is severely incomplete. It does not address return values, payload structure, or usage context, leaving the agent without essential information.

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 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of parameters like 'payload', 'confirmToken', 'responseMode', or 'mutationApproved'. The agent lacks any semantic guidance for these fields, making correct invocation unlikely.

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?

Describes tool as 'metadata.get_user' with '(read)' indication, clearly specifying it retrieves user metadata. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like remnawave_users_get or remnawave_metadata_get_node, missing explicit distinction.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as remnawave_users_get or remnawave_metadata_get_node. The description lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios, providing no usage direction.

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