get-my-member-info

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so safety is covered; the description adds the non-obvious behavioral fact that it derives identity from the auth token rather than input, and enumerates the profile fields returned. Not a 5 because it doesn't say what happens on an invalid/expired token or whether any profile fields can be absent.

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 front-loaded purpose sentence is good, but the member-ID point is made three separate times (intro, the returns bullet, and the closing line), and the examples block adds little for a zero-param tool. It's readable but noticeably padded for what is essentially one fact plus a return-field list.

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?

There is no output schema, no parameters, and simple annotations, yet the description fully compensates by describing the returned profile fields and the auth-derived behavior. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and reuse the returned ID.

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?

Zero-parameter tool, so the baseline is 4. The description still earns that baseline by explicitly stating 'No parameters needed - it automatically uses your authentication token', preempting an agent from inventing an ID argument.

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 ('Get information about the authenticated user') and immediately scopes it to the caller's own profile via API token, which separates it from the sibling get-member / get-member-list tools that target arbitrary members. It also names the key payload (the member ID), so an agent understands the tool's real purpose, not just its surface action.

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 timing guidance ('This is often the first tool to call to get your member ID for use in other tools like list-tasks') plus concrete example utterances. It stops short of naming the sibling alternatives (get-member, get-member-list) that an agent might otherwise pick, so it lacks the explicit exclusion that would earn a 5.

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