planka_get_me

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It correctly indicates a read operation (get), but does not specify behavior on authentication failure, side effects, or rate limits. For a simple identity fetch, it is minimally adequate.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and output. It is front-loaded with the important information and contains no unnecessary words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It states what the tool returns (id, username, role) and implies the target identity (authenticated user). No additional context is needed.

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 one parameter 'response_format' with a default and enum, and the schema provides a description. However, the tool description itself adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not mention the parameter at all. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 tool retrieves the authenticated user's identity, listing the specific fields (id, username, role). It uses a specific verb 'get' and resource 'authenticated user identity', and distinguishes well from sibling tools which focus on other entities like cards, boards, labels, etc.

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 implies the tool is to be used when the agent needs the current user's identity, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus other tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, though the use case is straightforward.

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