Retrieves profile information for the currently authenticated Stashcat user.
Returns profile information for the currently authenticated user.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_me"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure responsibility. 'Returns profile information' accurately indicates a read-only operation with no side effects. It does not mention error conditions, but for a parameterless getter the behavior is straightforward and sufficiently transparent.
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 imparts all necessary information without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete. It fully specifies what the tool returns and requires no additional context for an agent to use it correctly.
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 input schema is empty and the description adds no parameter details, but none are needed since there is nothing to configure.
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 uses the specific verb 'Returns' and clearly identifies the resource ('profile information') and scope ('for the currently authenticated user'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_user, which likely fetches another user's profile, and get_account_settings, which covers settings rather than profile info.
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 phrase 'currently authenticated user' gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: whenever the agent needs the profile of the user currently making the request. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the naming and scope make it obvious in comparison to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.