people_getMe

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not discuss response format, required permissions, rate limits, or any other operational details. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description still fails to disclose anything extra about the tool's behavior.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or extraneous information.

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?

For a tool with no parameters, no output schema, and a read-only annotation, the description provides sufficient context by stating what is returned (profile information of the authenticated user). While a fuller spec of returned fields would help, it is not essential for this simple getter.

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 input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage vacuously), so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameters exist to document.

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 ('Gets') and clearly specifies the resource ('profile information of the authenticated user'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like people_getUserProfile by focusing on the authenticated user, making the 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 when to use this tool (when the current user's profile is needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools exist for other profiles, but no direct comparison is provided, so usage guidance is merely implied rather than stated.

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