hn_user

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

No annotations provided. The description only states the function without disclosing any behavioral traits such as required authentication, rate limits, error handling, or the structure of the response. The tool performs a read operation, but this is not explicitly confirmed.

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 extremely concise (6 words) and front-loaded with the key verb and resource. It wastes no words, making it efficient for quick understanding. However, it may be too minimal for full clarity.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It does not describe return values, error conditions, or the depth of user profile data. Given the lack of annotations and schema coverage, it could be more informative.

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% and the description does not add meaning to the 'username' parameter beyond its name. No guidance on format, case sensitivity, or constraints is provided. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Hacker News user profile'. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like hn_item or hn_stories which deal with stories and items, not user profiles.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is clear that this is for user profiles, the description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Siblings exist for stories, but no direct comparison is made.

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