Get User

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

The description clearly labels the operation as read-only ('Read'), which is the key behavioral trait, and no annotations are present to cover safety. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, error behavior, or response characteristics, leaving some behavioral burden unmet.

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 a single sentence with no filler and front-loads the verb and object. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy with the title or schema.

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 one-parameter read operation, the description conveys enough to make a basic call. However, it omits differentiation from get_user_contents and does not clarify id_or_slug semantics or return shape, leaving clear gaps despite the low complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description needed to compensate for parameter meaning. It never mentions id_or_slug or how to format it, though the parameter name is mildly self-explanatory. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 ('Read') and resource ('user profile details'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It does not explicitly distinguish it from the sibling get_user_contents, though 'profile details' hints at the difference.

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 siblings like get_user_contents or search_arena. There are no prerequisites, context cues, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and minimal description.

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