get_suprsend_user

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

While the description mentions the operation is a GET and returns data, the annotations include destructiveHint: true, which contradicts the read-only nature implied by the description. This inconsistency makes transparency poor.

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 well-structured with distinct sections: general purpose, when to use, when not to use, and return format. It is concise without unnecessary text.

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 description compensates for the lack of an output schema by detailing the return format (YAML with distinct_id, properties, created_at, updated_at, channels). It covers purpose, usage, and output comprehensively, though the annotation contradiction reduces completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond identifying the required distinct_id. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a SuprSend user's full state by distinct_id', specifying the verb (Get), resource (SuprSend user), and identifier. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by listing when not to use and alternative tools.

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 provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, with specific alternative tools (get_suprsend_object, get_suprsend_user_preferences, etc.), giving clear guidance on tool selection.

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