get_current_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, the description doesn't specify what information is returned, authentication requirements, error conditions, or rate limits. It mentions 'authenticated user' but doesn't clarify what happens if no user is authenticated.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters and gets straight to the point.

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 user retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what user information is returned (e.g., ID, name, email, permissions), authentication requirements, or error handling. The agent would need to guess about the response format and behavioral characteristics.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and the schema already fully documents this. No additional parameter information is needed or provided.

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 the action ('Get') and resource ('current authenticated user'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_user' or 'get_user_by_email', but the focus on 'current authenticated' user provides some implicit differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_user' or 'get_user_by_email'. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication status) or specific contexts where this tool is appropriate versus other user retrieval methods.

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