Get Current User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by detailing the return fields and explaining the meaning of 'home_cluster' (personal-section slug). This contextual elaboration goes beyond the structured annotations, even though it does not cover all possible return value attributes (output schema handles that).

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 (with a parenthetical elaboration) that promptly states the purpose and key outputs. Every word earns its place, and there is no superfluous content.

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 an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior. It explains the most salient return field (home_cluster) and implies the others. The fact that it does not list every field in detail is acceptable given the output schema's existence.

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 description has no parameter documentation burden. Baseline is 4. The description adds meaning to the return values, particularly 'home_cluster', which is valuable beyond the schema's type definition.

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 the tool retrieves the calling Yandex Wiki user and enumerates specific fields (username, home_cluster, identity/org ids). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are all page/grid operations, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. However, since no sibling tools serve a similar user-identification purpose, the usage context is implied: use this to get current user info. The absence of exclusions or alternatives makes it minimally adequate.

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