whoami

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the returned profile is scoped to the current API key, which explains both the absence of parameters and the tool's role as a credential check.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose first, usage second. Nothing redundant and no 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?

A read-only, zero-argument identity tool with an output schema available, so return-value detail is unnecessary in the description. Everything an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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 takes zero parameters, which sets the baseline at 4. The description reinforces this by implying the identity is derived from the API key rather than from any argument, so an agent will not hunt for an input it should supply.

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 and resource: 'Return the Cloudcraft user profile for the current API key.' This is unambiguous and clearly distinct from every sibling (blueprints, teams, AWS/Azure accounts), none of which return identity data.

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?

Gives explicit context for when to reach for it: 'Useful as a sanity check after configuring a new key.' That is a concrete usage scenario rather than implied guidance, though it names no exclusions or alternatives (none really exist here).

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