placetel_get_meRetrieves the authenticated user's profile information from the Placetel API. Use it to fetch account details via a read-only GET request.
Me. (GET /me) Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| response_format | No | Output format: 'markdown' (human-readable, default) or 'json' (machine-readable). | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description's 'Read-only' merely repeats one annotation and adds no further behavioral context such as what identity data is returned or any auth assumptions.
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 very short and front-loaded with the endpoint. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to under-specification rather than helpful conciseness.
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 read-only identity endpoint, annotations cover safety and the schema covers the lone parameter, but the description omits the essential purpose: returning the current authenticated user's information. That gap makes it hard to select confidently against sibling user tools.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single response_format parameter is already fully documented. The description adds no parameter meaning, but the baseline is 3 when the schema carries the parameter semantics.
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 essentially restates the title 'Me' and adds only the HTTP endpoint (GET /me). It does not state in plain language that this retrieves the currently authenticated user/account, leaving the agent to infer the resource and operation.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as placetel_get_user or placetel_list_users. The agent must infer that this is for the current identity rather than an arbitrary user lookup.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.