Whoami

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that it reveals the current account identity, granted scopes, Docmost version, and where the member can review or revoke connected apps and tokens.

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 compact and front-loaded: it first states exactly what is shown, then gives the diagnostic use case. Every clause contributes either return-content information or invocation guidance.

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, an output schema present, and annotations declaring a safe read-only diagnostic, the description supplies enough context for correct invocation. It explains the purpose, what the agent will learn, and when to reach for it.

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 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies that no input is needed to perform the identity check, and there are no parameter semantics to 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, "Show," and clearly enumerates the concrete resources returned: acting account, granted scopes, Docmost version, and account connection page. An agent can immediately tell this is an identity/diagnostic tool, distinct from all sibling document and workspace-management tools.

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 an explicit usage context: "Use it when unsure whose rights you act with or why a tool is missing." That is strong guidance for when to call it, though it does not name exclusions or direct alternatives, which is less necessary here because no sibling serves the same diagnostic role.

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