planview_get_current_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the core read-only behavior via 'Get information'. It does not mention response contents, authentication requirements, or failure modes, but for a simple no-parameter getter these omissions are less impactful.

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?

A single sentence with no filler; the core action and target are front-loaded. Nothing extraneous is included.

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 current-user getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete for invoking the tool. It could add what fields are returned or clarify that the result is the authenticated caller's profile, but the current wording is enough to select and call it.

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 schema fully covers parameter semantics vacuously. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools applies.

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') and a specific resource ('information about the currently authenticated user'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is naturally distinct from sibling tools focused on work items, projects, and requests, though it does not explicitly call out that distinction.

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 phrase 'currently authenticated user' implies the tool is used when the agent needs the identity or profile of the caller, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. There are no sibling user-focused tools to contrast with, so the implied usage is reasonably clear.

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