get-user

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint), so the behavioral burden is light. The description adds that the call yields the account id used by downstream non-host-scoped tools, which is useful operational context, though it doesn't detail the shape of the returned user object.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose followed by use/avoid conditions. Every sentence carries routing or scoping information; no filler.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and no nesting, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what it returns (user info and user_id), when it is the right call, and which sibling to use instead for host listing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4 with no parameter semantics to explain. The description does not need to bridge any schema gap here.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get current Webmaster user info and user_id'), and explicitly distinguishes its scope from the sibling list-hosts. An agent can identify this as the account-identity lookup without opening a schema.

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?

Gives both when to use ('when the user needs the Webmaster account id before a call that is not already scoped to a host') and when not to use ('Do not use it to list sites'), naming the alternative tool list-hosts. Nothing is left to inference.

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