read_me

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety needs no restating. The description adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations: the meaning of the tokenRenewalDue flag and the corrective action to take before token expiry. It stops short of describing the full return shape, but the added token-lifecycle detail is genuine value.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the identity content and followed by the token caveat. No filler, though the bare `leap pair` reference assumes context the agent may not have.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description names the key returned fields (profile id, name, admin flag) and explains the tokenRenewalDue flag semantics. It is nearly complete save for the lack of sibling differentiation.

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 takes zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is required and the baseline is 4. The description also clarifies output fields, which partially compensates for the absent output 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 states a specific resource (the currently signed-in identity) and enumerates the returned fields: profile id, name, and admin status. It is clear about what 'me' resolves to, but it does not distinguish this tool from near siblings like read_profile or read_account, leaving an agent to infer which identity-read to pick.

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?

Usage is only implied: it is the identity check, and the tokenRenewalDue note gives a follow-up action ('run `leap pair` again before it expires'). There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not, nor any routing against the read_profile/read_account siblings.

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