rx_whoami

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is already covered. The description adds that there are no parameters and that nothing is modified ('ничего не меняет'), reinforcing the read-only contract. It does not, however, disclose anything about the return shape or failure mode, so it stops short of 5.

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?

Three short clauses: what it returns, when to invoke it, and confirmation of no parameters / no side effects. Front-loaded with the identity answer and zero 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?

For a zero-parameter identity lookup with annotations covering read-only semantics and no output schema required, the description supplies everything needed: the fields returned, the invocation trigger, and the no-op contract.

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?

Parameter count is 0 and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly notes 'Параметров нет', confirming the empty signature rather than adding new meaning, which is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (identify current Directum RX user) and enumerates exactly what is returned (name, Id, position, department). No sibling tool competes with this identity-lookup purpose.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger condition: call first when the acting user is unknown. This gives an agent an actionable when-to-use rule and a 'call first' priority ordering, which is more than most siblings provide.

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