yd_webmaster_user_get

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. It describes the tool as a 'get' operation, implying read-only, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with tool scope, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description provides basic functionality but lacks detail on the exact return structure beyond user_id. It is minimally adequate.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, so no parameter info is needed. The description adds no parameter details, but with no parameters, baseline is 4.

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), the resource (current authenticated user info), and specifies it returns user_id. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like yd_webmaster_host_get which retrieves host info.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when-not or provide context for selecting this over other user-related tools.

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