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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying the concrete informational payload (auth mode types, workspace, plan limits), which helps the agent predict output beyond the annotations alone.

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?

One tight sentence delivers the core purpose and the full inventory of returned information without filler. Every element contributes to the agent's understanding, and the most important noun phrase ('current identity') is front-loaded.

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?

This is a low-complexity, read-only introspection tool with a single well-documented parameter, a complete output schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency. The description, schema, and annotations together provide everything an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly.

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 single 'context' parameter has 100% schema description coverage, and the schema meaningfully explains what to provide ('the user's underlying goal'). The tool description adds no extra parameter guidance, but none is needed given the schema already carries the full semantic weight; this meets the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') with a well-scoped resource ('current identity') and enumerates exactly what is returned: auth mode, active workspace, and plan limits. This distinguishes it clearly from all sibling tools, none of which are identity-focused.

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 purpose statement makes the usage context clear: call this when you need to know the current identity, auth mode, workspace, or plan limits. No sibling tool overlaps with this function, so exclusions and alternatives are not necessary; the context is unambiguous.

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