taiga_users_get

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose potential error handling, authentication requirements, or return format. It is not misleading, but it is minimal and lacks detail beyond the basic action.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes meaning; no redundant or extraneous content.

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 tool's low complexity and complete parameter schema, the description is adequate for basic understanding. However, with no output schema, it does not specify the return structure, and it lacks guidance on how this tool fits among numerous siblings (e.g., users_list, users_me), leaving some context incomplete.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter 'id' with description 'User ID' (100% coverage). The description's phrase 'by ID' merely restates this without adding semantics like format, constraints, or example values. Baseline 3 applies.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resource ('a user') with the method ('by ID'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like users_list or users_me. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like users_list or users_me. However, the use case is naturally implied: retrieve a single user when the ID is known. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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