account_users_get

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds 'account-level SCIM user' but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as return format, pagination, or access requirements. Given the annotation covers the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, conveying the essential purpose efficiently.

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 simple read-only tool with one required parameter, an existing output schema, and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides sufficient context. It clearly states what the tool does without needing additional details about return values or side effects.

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 coverage is 100% with the single parameter 'id' described as 'User ID'. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., how to obtain the ID or its format). Baseline 3 is correct since the schema already handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 'Fetch an account-level SCIM user' uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('account-level SCIM user'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like account_users_create, account_users_delete, and account_users_list. It immediately conveys the action and object type.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., account_users_list for listing all users). There are no usage context, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and parameter.

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