MCP-Airflow-API

get_user

Retrieve details of a specific user via the Airflow v1 API. Provide the username to get user information.

Instructions

[Tool Role]: Gets details of a specific user (v1 API only).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`username`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the 'v1 API only' version constraint, which is useful, and 'Gets' implies a read-only operation. However, it does not specify permissions, error conditions, 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's role without any wasted words. The '[Tool Role]:' prefix is a minor stylistic choice but does not harm clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the low parameter coverage, lack of annotations, and minimal description, the tool is under-specified. There is no guidance on when to use it, no mention of behavioral nuances beyond the version, and no clarification of what 'details' includes. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates return-value documentation, but overall completeness is lacking.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one parameter ('username') with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the parameter's meaning or format beyond the schema, only that it targets a 'specific user'. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate, but it does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('details of a specific user'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_users (list vs. single) and get_provider (different resource). The 'v1 API only' qualifier adds specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'specific user' implies this tool is for retrieving a single user's details rather than listing all users, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives (e.g., 'use list_users for all users'). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server