Get Current User

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It reveals read-only intent via the GET endpoint and links to configured credentials, but does not explicitly state auth requirements, possible errors (e.g., invalid credentials), or output structure. It provides some context but omits failure modes and side-effect absence.

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 sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose, followed by the endpoint in parentheses. It is front-loaded, concise, 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 zero-parameter, read-only identity tool, the description gives enough context for an agent to know when and why to call it. Although there is no output schema or annotation, the description's clarity mitigates the need for extensive detail. However, it could specify the returned fields or error scenarios for full completeness.

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 empty schema provides complete coverage, and the description need not explain any parameter semantics. Nothing more is required.

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 identifies the tool's function: returning the Jira user identity associated with the configured credentials. It uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('user identity'), and includes the REST endpoint for precision. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which focus on issues, projects, or comments.

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 intended usage is clear: call this tool to retrieve the current user's identity. While it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, no sibling tool serves this purpose, so the context is sufficient without exclusions or when-not guidance.

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