who_am_i

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns all visible content under a tier, implying a read operation, but lacks details on permissions, what 'visible' means, or whether the operation is expensive. Some transparency but insufficient depth.

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 consists of two short, direct sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately clarifies when to use the tool.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the overall purpose and the parameter's role, though it could briefly mention what 'all visible content' entails. Still, it is adequate for a straightforward tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially explains the 'viewer_tier' parameter by mentioning '该 tier', indicating it controls which tier's content is included. However, it does not explain possible values or the default behavior, adding some but not complete meaning.

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 tool returns a complete self-introduction composed of all visible content under a specified tier. The verb '返回' and resource '自我介绍' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools that handle individual context operations.

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 provides a clear use case: when switching to a new AI, call this tool to help it know you. It does not explicitly exclude alternative uses or compare to siblings, but the context is clear.

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