trybiut_me

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. It states the tool verifies a token and returns a profile, which implies a read-only operation and a login requirement. However, it does not mention potential failure modes (e.g., invalid/expired token), rate limits, or whether any side effects occur. This is a minimal but non-tautological behavioral disclosure.

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 brief sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded ('Verify the API token and return the logged-in user profile'), followed by the key precondition ('Requires login'). Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the resource involved, and the login precondition. It does not detail the profile structure or error handling, but given the simplicity of the operation, the agent has enough context to 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 has zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed due to the empty schema.

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 the verb ('Verify', 'return') and resource ('API token', 'logged-in user profile'), and the tool name 'me' aligns with retrieving the current user. This distinguishes it from siblings like trybiut_status (API status) and trybiut_auth_register (authentication creation).

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?

'Requires login' clearly implies the tool is meant to be used after authentication, providing context for invocation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool appears to serve the same purpose (fetch current user profile), so the guidance is adequate.

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