npm_get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description fails to disclose what happens when the id does not exist (e.g., returns null or 404), whether the response is the full user object, or any auth/rate-limit considerations. For a tool with no safety annotations, this is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place with no filler or redundancy. This is the ideal size for a simple getter tool.

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 is simple with one required param and no output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks any mention of return value, error behavior, or not-found cases. Given there is no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context would improve completeness. It is not egregiously incomplete but has clear gaps.

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 fully defines the single parameter 'id' with type and constraints (integer > 0). The description adds only 'by id', which is marginal. Since the schema already provides complete parameter details, the low schema description coverage (0%) is not a practical issue, but the description does not enrich the semantics beyond the schema.

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' with a specific resource ('a single user') and key qualifier 'by id'. It directly contrasts with the sibling tool 'npm_list_users', making it unambiguous which tool to use for fetching one user.

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 phrase 'by id' implicitly indicates that this tool is appropriate when you have a specific user ID, and that list tools should be used otherwise. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not fully explicit.

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