zdx_get_application_user

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true`, and the description repeats 'read-only', adding no new behavioral details. It does not disclose aspects like error handling, permission requirements, or rate limits. With annotations covering read-only intent, the description meets minimum adequacy but adds no extra value.

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 is highly concise and front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose with no fluff. Ideal length for a simple get tool.

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?

Given that the input schema is rich with descriptions and an output schema exists, the description covers the essential purpose. However, it omits mention of optional parameters (since, service) and their defaults, which could be useful for an agent. Still, context is largely adequate.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already explains `app_id`, `user_id`, `since`, and `service`. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage hints for parameters. Baseline score 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?

Description clearly states 'Get a specific ZDX application user', indicating the verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific ZDX application user'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `zdx_list_application_users` (which lists) and other `zdx_get_*` tools by specifying 'application user'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not contrast with `zdx_list_application_users` or mention prerequisites like existing application or user IDs. The description provides no contextual clues for appropriate usage.

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