Who am I on Trood

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a session-shape check that reveals roles and active workspace, but doesn't mention auth failure behavior or what happens when no session exists, which would matter for a session-verification tool.

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: the first defines the payload, the second front-loads the primary usage. No waste, though the enumerations could be slightly compressed.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is nearly sufficient. It would be complete if it hinted at the failure mode when the session is invalid, since that is the tool's stated purpose.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning about what the parameterless call returns rather than repeating schema content.

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 resource: the signed-in person, plus the concrete fields returned (name, roles, workspaces, active workspace, analytics status). It separates this cleanly from sibling tools such as get_company and use_workspace.

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 gives explicit guidance to 'Use it first to check the session works,' which is a clear trigger. It doesn't contrast with alternatives or say when not to use it, but the 'first' call framing is genuinely actionable.

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