current_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is a read ('Get information') and enumerates the returned fields, conveying a non-destructive profile. It does not explicitly state 'does not modify data' or 'requires authentication', but 'currently authenticated user' implies an auth context.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear opening sentence followed by bullet points listing the retrieved information and a return type. Every sentence earns its place, and it's not padded with fluff.

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 simple zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the purpose, what data is retrieved, and the return type. No further context is needed for an agent 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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema confirms this (100% coverage with empty properties). Per the rubric, the baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds context about the return value, which is helpful.

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 ('Get information') and clearly identifies the resource ('currently authenticated user'). It lists the specific data categories returned, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_users that deal with all users.

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 clearly implies usage context: use this tool when you need information about the currently authenticated user. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is clear enough to guide tool selection alongside siblings like list_users.

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