get_user

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states basic functionality with no mention of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or data freshness. For a read tool, this is minimal transparency.

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, no filler. All information is front-loaded. Every word is necessary.

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?

Lacks output schema and does not explain return structure or available fields. However, for a simple lookup tool with well-documented parameters, it is minimally adequate but could clarify expected behavior (e.g., multiple IDs, error states).

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 100% (both params have descriptions). The description adds no new parameter details beyond the schema's 'ID or screen_name' and 'additional fields' hints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already covers parameters.

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 tool retrieves user information by ID or screen_name, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It helps distinguish from siblings like get_friends (friends list) or get_groups (groups), but could be improved by mentioning returned fields.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_friends or get_wall. The description does not include usage context, prerequisites, or differentiation from siblings.

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