auth_get_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention that the user must be authenticated, what happens if no session exists, or what data is returned. The description only states the basic action and lacks important behavioral 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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words or filler.

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?

The tool is very simple (no parameters), and the description is adequate. However, with no output schema, the agent does not know what 'user information' includes (e.g., id, email). Additionally, there is no mention of authentication requirements. For such a simple tool, this is a minor gap, hence a mid-range score.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not add parameter details because none exist, but that is acceptable here.

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 what it does: 'Get current authenticated user information'. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current authenticated user information'), and it is easily distinguishable from sibling auth tools like auth_login and auth_logout.

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 alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., user must be logged in), and no exclusions. The description simply states the operation without contextualizing its usage among sibling tools.

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