TimeTree MCP Server

get_current_user

Read-only

Retrieve the signed-in TimeTree user's ID and name to identify yourself among calendar members, event attendees, comment authors, and activity.

Instructions

Return the signed-in TimeTree user's user ID and name. Use it to find "me" among calendar members (get_calendar_members), event attendees, comment authors, and activity.

Tool call template

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_current_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`user_id`	Yes	Same as user_id in get_calendar_members and event attendees

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.7.0Oct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety and scope are covered structurally. The description adds that the result is an ID plus a name, which is useful, but says nothing further about availability, auth requirements, or failure modes. Adequate but not rich beyond 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the return values, then the actionable usage guidance. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A no-parameter identity lookup with an output schema and read-only annotations needs only its return values and intended use explained, and the description does exactly that. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The schema is empty and fully covered, and the description correctly describes only the return payload rather than implying any input it would need.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb+resource: returns the signed-in TimeTree user's user ID and name. It is clearly distinct from lookalikes such as get_calendar_members, which return other users, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit use cases—finding "me" among calendar members, event attendees, comment authors, and activity—and names get_calendar_members as the related call. It gives clear context but does not state any when-not-to-use condition, keeping it just short of a 5.

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