users_get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It merely restates the 'Get' verb with no added behavioral context: no mention of error handling (e.g., 404 if user not found), permissions, or side effects. The include parameter's effect on response is also undisclosed.

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?

Single sentence with a category prefix, front-loaded and zero wasted words. Perfectly concise.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description lacks parameter semantics and usage guidance. The unexplained include parameter is a notable gap; the tool is simple but still under-specified for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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%, and the description does not compensate. 'Specific user' hints at user_id, but the include parameter (likely controlling extra data) remains completely undocumented. The agent cannot infer its semantics from the description.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'specific user', clearly distinguishing from siblings like users_list (which lists all users) and users_modify/users_delete. The added category prefix [Users/Management] also aids context.

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?

Usage is implied: use when you need details of one specific user. No explicit guidance on when not to use (e.g., for bulk retrieval use users_list) or mention of alternatives. Provides a clear context but no exclusions.

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