Retrieve the current Sitecore user to identify the authenticated account for security checks and permission debugging.
Get the current Sitecore user.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| full | No | Return the unprojected .NET object graph. Very large (100,000+ chars/item); diagnostics only. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond that – it does not explain what 'current user' means in this context (e.g., tied to authentication, returns limited fields) or any side effects. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but this description offers 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?
The description is a single, clear sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized, though it could be slightly more specific about scope.
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 simplicity of the tool (read-only, one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it fails to clarify how 'current user' is determined (e.g., from authentication context) or what fields are returned, which might be important given the absence of an output schema.
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%, and the single optional parameter 'full' is fully documented in the schema, including its effect and warnings. The description appropriately does not repeat this, so baseline 4 applies for zero required parameters and high schema coverage.
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 'Get the current Sitecore user' states a clear verb and resource, identifying it as a read operation. However, it does not distinguish it from the sibling 'security-get-user', which presumably retrieves a specified user, leaving potential ambiguity without opening schemas.
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 security-get-user or other security tools. There is no mention of context (e.g., current authenticated session) or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.