hermes_me

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It communicates that this is a read-only operation ('Get') and that authentication via session cookie is involved. However, it does not mention response format, potential errors, or any side effects, though those are less critical for a zero-parameter profile lookup.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the secondary usage hint adds value without redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read-only profile endpoint with a simple purpose and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. An agent can determine what this tool does and when to call it without additional context.

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 there is no parameter meaning to add beyond the schema. The baseline of 4 applies because the absence of parameters makes parameter documentation unnecessary.

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 and resource: 'Get the currently authenticated user's profile in Hermes.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which all operate on products, projects, drafts, or documents.

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 explicitly states a concrete use case: 'Useful to confirm the session cookie is working.' It does not name alternative tools or when not to use it, but no sibling tool appears to be a direct alternative for retrieving the current user's profile.

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