get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool 'gets' a user, implying read-only behavior, but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the user is not found. This is insufficient transparency.

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 is concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundant information. It achieves high density of meaning.

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?

The tool has an output schema (not provided), so return values are presumably documented elsewhere. The description covers identification methods and a platform dependency. However, it lacks details on error cases (e.g., user not found) or prerequisites, but for a simple get tool, it is fairly complete.

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 defines the 'user' parameter as a plain string, but the description adds meaning by explaining it can be 'id, login, or me'. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage and helps the agent understand valid inputs.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'user', specifying identification by 'id, login, or `me`', which distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_user. It is specific and directly addresses what the tool does.

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 clear context on when to use (to get a user by various identifiers) and mentions the conditional support for 'me'. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases or compare to alternatives like get_current_user, leaving room for slight ambiguity.

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