ifood_customer_meRetrieve the authenticated iFood customer profile with identity redacted by default. Select privacy mode for summary, structured, or raw data and choose markdown or JSON output.
Authenticated customer profile. Identity redacted by default.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| privacy_mode | No | ||
| response_format | No | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the non-obvious default behavior that identity is redacted, which is valuable beyond the annotations. It does not contradict the annotations.
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 exceptionally concise, with two short sentences that both add meaningful information. The core purpose is front-loaded and there is no 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?
With no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description leaves significant gaps. An agent cannot determine what summary, structured, or raw modes return or how response_format affects the output, despite the annotations covering safety.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain privacy_mode or response_format. 'Identity redacted by default' hints at privacy-related behavior but does not clarify the enum values or what each mode returns.
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 that the tool returns the authenticated customer's profile, making the resource and scope clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like order, payment, and merchant tools, though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'get' or 'retrieve'.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. The phrase 'authenticated customer profile' implies the use case, but no conditions, alternatives, or exclusions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.