get_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get a single...' which suggests a read operation, but it does not explicitly describe safety, return values, error behavior, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations and no output schema.

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 concise and efficient, with three short sentences. Each sentence earns its place: the first states the purpose, the second clarifies two parameters, and the third explains the critical user_id provenance. No redundancy or 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?

The description fully covers parameter semantics and hints at the required workflow, but it lacks any mention of return payload, error conditions, or permission requirements. Since there is no output schema, the description should at least indicate what the 'entry' contains or what happens on failure, leaving the context incomplete.

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 provides no property descriptions (0% coverage), but the description richly explains each parameter: host (console name, ID, or composite ID format), site (name or ID), and user_id (required, sourced from list_users). This adds essential meaning far beyond the bare schema definition.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a single DHCP/client-alias entry by ID.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from list-type tools like list_users or other getters such as get_client by narrowing the resource type to DHCP/client-alias entries.

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 implies a usage flow by instructing to obtain user_id from list_users, giving context on how to prepare parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over similar getters (e.g., get_client, get_host) or provide exclusions, so guidance is only implicit.

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