teamleader_users_me

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation without elaborating on the return format, side effects (e.g., read-only nature), or any prerequisites. This is minimally transparent for a simple get operation but lacks useful context.

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-formed sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. There is no wasted text, and it is front-loaded with the action verb.

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 no-parameter tool, the description is adequate. It lacks an explicit mention of the return value (e.g., a user object), but given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation, this is a minor gap. The description covers the essential purpose completely.

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 schema fully covers everything. According to the rubric, a 0-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it does not.

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 'Get the currently authenticated user' uses a specific verb 'Get' and a clear resource ('currently authenticated user'), making it distinct from sibling tools like 'teamleader_users_list' and 'teamleader_users_info' which operate on either all users or a specific user by ID.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is the appropriate choice when you need the profile of the logged-in user specifically, nor does it exclude other use cases. The description simply states the action without contextual usage advice.

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