Utilisateur courant BoondManager

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds minor context by listing the kind of info returned (profile, permissions, agency), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements or rate limits. The description does not contradict 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and briefly note the return type. Every word contributes value, with no redundant or vague phrases.

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 (zero parameters, clear annotations, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. However, it could be slightly improved by explicitly stating that the output contains the current user's full details (e.g., ID, email, profile). Still, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to choose and invoke the tool 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 baseline is 4. The description adds value by hinting at the type of data returned, which is not purely parameter-related but compensates for the lack of output schema. Schema coverage is 100% (no parameters), so no additional parameter documentation needed.

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 information about the currently connected user, specifying details like profile, permissions, and agency. The verb 'Récupère' and resource 'utilisateur actuellement connecté' make the purpose specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like 'get' and 'search' for other entities.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, since it retrieves the current user's info, the usage context is implied (e.g., when needing authenticated user details). No exclusion criteria or alternative tools are provided.

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