quip_get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the profile is for the current authenticated user, implying auth is required, but does not elaborate on side effects, return format specifics, or error conditions. For a simple read-only tool, this is moderate transparency.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key return contents. There is no redundant information or filler, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description adequately covers the return values (name, email, folder IDs) and the authentication context. It does not mention error scenarios or additional fields, but the simplicity of the tool reduces the need for more detail.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and the description correctly adds no parameter information. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, this scores 4; the description instead focuses on return values, which is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Get the current authenticated Quip user's profile' with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current authenticated Quip user's profile'). It further lists what is included (name, email, key folder IDs), distinguishing this tool from siblings that deal with folders, documents, search, and browsing.

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 implies usage for retrieving the current user's profile, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, so guidance is implied rather than stated.

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