من کیستم / میزکار فعال

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe read nature is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond that: it enumerates the concrete fields returned (role, creation rights, plan type) and explains the plan gating semantics for advanced features, which is genuinely useful behavioral 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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then the plan-tier caveat, which is relevant but a bit dense. It is slightly long and mixes return-value enumeration with usage guidance, but every sentence carries useful 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?

With no output schema and no annotations covering return content, the description does the heavy lifting by naming the returned fields and plan semantics. It is almost complete for an identity tool, though it could note whether the plan info is authoritative or cached.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a parameterless call (call it first for your own id) and adds no misleading parameter expectations.

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 clearly states it returns the logged-in user, the active workspace, and switchable workspaces with role and plan info. This is a specific identity/context retrieval resource and is reasonably distinguishable from siblings like mizito_workspace_info or mizito_list_users, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives to sharpen the boundary.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use guidance: call it first to get your own user id (e.g., to self-assign a task) or to check admin/guest status. It stops short of naming when not to use it or which sibling to prefer for other identity/workspace queries.

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