whoami

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it signals a read-only retrieval ('Return') and notes the authentication requirement ('authenticated user'). It does not describe failure behavior or exactly what a profile contains, but for a side-effect-free, parameterless tool this is minimally adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's function.

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 no-parameter, simple read tool, the description provides the essential context: it returns the authenticated user's profile. A fuller return-shape breakdown would be helpful since there is no output schema, but the current description is unlikely to lead an agent astray.

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 and the schema has 100% coverage of an empty property set, so there are no parameters needing documentation. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are required.

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 ('Return') and a clear resource ('the authenticated user's profile'), which precisely identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like get_my_listings or login_start. Even with no parameters, the intended purpose is immediately 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 clearly implies the tool is used to retrieve the current authenticated user's identity/profile, which is the relevant context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool performs this exact function, so the guidance is sufficient.

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