bitbucket_whoami

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail by specifying the output fields (display name, uuid), which is especially valuable since no output schema is provided.

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 a single sentence that immediately states the action, the target, and the expected result. There is no wasted wording or redundant information.

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-only, idempotent identity tool with no output schema, this description is fully complete. An agent knows what the tool does, what it returns, and when to call it; no additional context is necessary.

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 has zero parametersaimanah, and the input schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description needs no parameter-related explanation because there is nothing to configure or clarify.

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 verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('the identity of the currently authenticated Bitbucket account'), and the exact returned fields ('display name, uuid'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like bitbucket_workspace_list or bitbucket_repository_list, which target different resources.

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 phrase 'currently authenticated Bitbucket account' provides clear context for when this tool should be used: when an agent needs the caller's own identity. There is no ambiguity about alternatives because no sibling tool performs this function, and no exclusions are needed.

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