get_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the mutation-safety profile. The description adds value by stating the return payload ('profile + linked accounts') and the authentication prerequisite ('Session JWT required'), which are not derivable from annotations or the empty input schema.

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 three tightly packed sentences with no filler. The most important instruction ('Call first') is front-loaded, followed by purpose, endpoint, return summary, ordering guidance, and auth requirement—every clause earns its place.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is nearly complete: it explains what the call returns, when to call it, and a key prerequisite. The only slight gap is that 'profile + linked accounts (title/email first)' is not a precise schema, and with no output schema this is partly ambiguous—but it is sufficient for a first-step discovery call.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema has no properties, so there is nothing for the description to illuminate. The mention of 'POST /v2/getUser {}' confirms a parameterless call, satisfying the baseline for a 0-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'learn who is signed in and which calendar accounts exist.' It clearly identifies the tool's role as a user-info retrieval call and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_calendar_lists or get_events by framing it as the prerequisite identity/account discovery step.

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?

It explicitly says 'Call first' and 'Use before get_calendar_lists / get_events,' giving concrete sequential guidance. It also mentions the session JWT requirement, which is a necessary invocation condition. This leaves no ambiguity about when or why to use the tool.

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