get_current_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by specifying exactly what information is returned: authenticated user, workspace context, detected version, and read-only session status. There is no contradiction with 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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then enumerates the exact return items with no filler or repetition. 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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully specifies what the agent can expect: user, workspace context, version, and read-only status. Combined with the read-only annotations, there is no missing operational or safety information.

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?

This tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because the description adds value by explaining the return scope, though it does not document parameters.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resources: authenticated user, workspace context, detected Docmost version, and read-only session status. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which target the current session context.

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 description makes the tool's purpose and context clear: it is for retrieving the current user/session context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but with zero parameters and a self-contained scope, the usage context is unambiguous enough.

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