whoami

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. It explains authentication context ('wallet authenticates') and the read-only nature (GET request), but does not explicitly state no side effects or other behavioral traits beyond what is implied.

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?

Concise and front-loaded: first sentence states main purpose, followed by HTTP path, return details, and sibling comparison. No wasted sentences.

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?

Complete for a simple read-only tool: explains output fields clearly, mentions authentication, and distinguishes from sibling. No output schema needed as description details return structure.

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?

No parameters in schema (baseline 4 for 0 params). Description does not add parameter-specific meaning but covers return fields comprehensively, which is sufficient given no inputs.

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?

Description clearly states the tool resolves the caller's control-plane principal and org memberships, providing the HTTP path and details of returned fields. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'status' for local state.

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?

Describes when to use this tool (remote identity) and explicitly directs users to an alternative ('status') for local wallet/profile state, giving clear when-not guidance.

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