zid_get_user

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

The description states 'read-only', which matches the annotation 'readOnlyHint: true'. Beyond this, it adds no further behavioral context (e.g., authorization, rate limits). The annotation already carries the burden, so the description provides no additional 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?

The description is a single concise sentence with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and fits well within typical usage.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, 1 required, output schema present), the description fully covers the necessary context. No gaps are apparent for a straightforward retrieval operation.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 applies as the schema covers parameter semantics adequately.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'a specific ZIdentity user by ID', and the read-only nature. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'zid_list_users' and other 'zid_get_*' tools, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 use for retrieving a single user by ID, which is adequate. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives such as 'zid_search_users' for non-ID lookups. Given the simplicity, the guidance is minimal but does not mislead.

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