x_get_me

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does disclose an important auth behavior (user-context token needed). However, it says nothing about return format, error cases, or data scope, so it is only partially transparent.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, and the key auth requirement is stated immediately. Every word adds value.

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 low-complexity tool with one documented optional parameter and no output schema, this description covers the essential purpose and the unique auth requirement. It could still benefit from an explicit statement of what is returned, but it is largely complete.

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 single optional parameter is already fully described in the schema, and the description adds no additional meaning about user.fields. This matches the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

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 identifies the resource as 'the authenticated user', which matches the tool name x_get_me and clearly targets the current user's profile. It lacks an explicit verb and does not draw a distinction from sibling tools like x_get_post, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It provides a clear condition for invocation: a user-context token is required and app-only auth is insufficient. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the auth constraint gives the agent actionable selection guidance.

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