users_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, rate limits, or required permissions. The read-only nature is implicit but not explicitly stated.

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 two sentences - clear first sentence and a helpful tip. It is appropriately sized with 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?

While an output schema exists (documenting return values), the description lacks context about what information is returned (e.g., profile fields, presence). For a user info tool, more context about the scope of 'information' would benefit the agent.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description only adds meaning for 'detailed' (boolean, suggests full response). It does not explain 'user' or 'include_locale', leaving those parameters unexplained beyond the schema's type info.

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 'Get information about a user', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like users_list (list users) and users_profile_get (get profile details), avoiding ambiguity.

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 mentions 'Set detailed=True for full response' but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives among the many user-related sibling tools (e.g., users_profile_get, users_get_presence). Implied usage but no explicit when/when-not.

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