Contract Testing: Get Current User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'Retrieve' which aligns, but provides no additional behavioral context beyond confirming the read-only nature.

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 is concise with a clear first sentence, followed by organized sections for Toolset and Parameters. Every element is useful and front-loaded.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it does and mentions the current user context. It does not detail the response fields but that is acceptable given tool simplicity and annotations.

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?

There are no parameters, and the input schema coverage is 100%. The description explicitly states 'Parameters: None', which is adequate for a no-parameter tool. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 'Retrieve the profile of the currently authenticated user'. The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'profile of currently authenticated user' are specific. Among siblings, contract-testing_admin_get_user retrieves a different user, so it is well-differentiated.

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 the toolset categorization but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It implicitly suggests usage when needing current user info, but lacks when-not or alternative guidance.

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