Retrieve the currently active persona for the session. Use this to identify the persona in effect and adapt responses accordingly.
Get the currently active persona for this session
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Persona ID | |
| icon | Yes | Persona icon (emoji) | |
| name | Yes | Human-readable persona name | |
| description | Yes | Persona description |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.4Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "description": {
+ "description": "Persona description",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "icon": {
+ "description": "Persona icon (emoji)",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Persona ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Human-readable persona name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "name",
+ "icon",
+ "description"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v1.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, and description adds no extra behavioral details; it's a simple getter.
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 concise sentence with no filler.
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 no parameters, no output schema, and a clear purpose, the description is sufficient; it doesn't need to explain more.
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?
No parameters, so schema fully covers; description adds nothing extra, but that's fine per 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?
Clearly states it retrieves the active persona, distinguishing from list_personas (listing all) and set_persona (setting).
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?
Provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over siblings, but the name and purpose make it obvious for fetching the current persona.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.