get_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return fields and HTTP method, indicating a read operation. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, error conditions, or rate limits. The return value info adds value beyond the 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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and endpoint, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded and every word serves a purpose.

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 simple nature of the tool (single required parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers purpose, return fields, and endpoint. It lacks guidance on potential error scenarios or when to use vs siblings, but overall is sufficient for basic usage.

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 has one required parameter (user_id) with no description, and the tool description does not add any semantic meaning about the parameter (e.g., format, allowed values, or usage context). Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate, leaving the parameter under-specified.

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 it retrieves a single user's profile with specific fields (name, role, license, contact info) and maps to a REST endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_users (multiple users) and get_company (different entity).

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 implies use when needing a single user's details but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_users or when to avoid it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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