Get Identity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are scoped to the active credential, but it does not reveal additional behavior beyond that scope.

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 with no filler; it states the resource, the action, and the scoping all in one clause. 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?

The tool is simple, has no required parameters, has an output schema, and has annotations that cover safety and mutability. The main gap is the lack of sibling differentiation, but the definition is otherwise complete for a read-only identity metadata lookup.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseUrl, profile, and frontendUrl are each already explained structurally. The description adds no parameter-level specifics, which is acceptable because the baseline is 3 when the schema documents all 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 ('Return') and clearly names the resource: Cloudeval identity and capability metadata for the active credential. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similar-sounding capabilities_get sibling beyond adding 'identity.'

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as capabilities_get, auth_status, or status. The description implies it is the way to inspect the current credential, but it never states a selection condition or exclusion.

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