whoamiIdentify the account this API key belongs to, and its plan. Useful for confirming the key works before doing real work.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying that the tool returns 'the account' and 'its plan,' and by explaining the purpose of verifying the key works. This goes beyond the safety hint without contradicting it.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a practical usage tip. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant or vague language.
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, no parameters, no output schema, and the presence of readOnlyHint, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. It is a complete and self-contained description for a whoami endpoint.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the description correctly makes no mention of parameters. According to the rubric, the baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools, and the description provides adequate context about the API key in its usage note, though it does not need to explain schemas.
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's function: 'Identify the account this API key belongs to, and its plan.' This is a specific verb + resource combination, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like connection and job management by focusing on API key identity.
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 provides explicit usage context: 'Useful for confirming the key works before doing real work.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. For a simple whoami tool, this is sufficient guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: connection lifecycle (create, verify, get, list), job lifecycle (run, get status, get result), and findings (list). Even get_job_result and list_cost_findings are clearly differentiated as raw vs. analyzed data, and whoami/list_tools_available serve metadata purposes.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_, get_, list_, run_, verify_). The only outlier is 'whoami', which breaks the pattern but is a recognizable convention for account identification. Overall naming is predictable and readable.
With 10 tools, the set is well-scoped for a cloud cost scanning platform. Each tool serves a clear purpose in the connection-scan-result workflow, with no redundancy or bloat.
The core scan workflow is covered (connect, verify, scan, get job, get findings), but there are notable gaps: no tool to delete/disconnect a cloud account, and no way to list past jobs or retrieve results without a prior job_id. These missing lifecycle/history operations could force agents to rely on external state or fail when context is lost.