pbs_user_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It declares the tool is READ-ONLY, lists returned fields, and explicitly states it does not return tokens or secrets. Could mention idempotence or error conditions but sufficient for safe usage.

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?

Every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with 'READ-ONLY', then clear list of returned fields, then sibling references, then config requirement. No wasted words.

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 output schema exists, description does not need to detail all return fields but still provides useful subset. Covers purpose, scope, and prerequisite config. Complete for a read-only get tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to parameters beyond what the schema provides (userid format is in schema, proximo_target is not mentioned).

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 is a read-only operation to get a PBS user's config, lists the specific fields returned, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like pbs_user_tokens_list and user management tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (get user config) vs alternatives: use pbs_user_tokens_list for tokens, and user_create/update/delete for management. Also mentions required PROXIMO_PBS_* config.

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