Get Current User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns extra credit by enumerating the returned fields (accountId, displayName, email, active) in the absence of an output schema; it does not cover auth-failure behavior or whether email may be hidden by privacy settings.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the return contract are delivered immediately with zero waste.

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-arg read with no output schema, listing the returned fields makes the tool callable without guesswork. The only shortfall is the unstated boundary versus jcm_lookupUser and the absence of any auth-prerequisite note.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is needed by framing the call around the authenticated session.

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?

Specific verb ('Returns') plus a precisely scoped resource ('the authenticated Atlassian user's account info'), which implicitly separates it from jcm_lookupUser, the sibling that looks up arbitrary users. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation requires the agent to infer it.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'authenticated user' signals the self-lookup case. There is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over jcm_lookupUser, nor any note that it requires an active authenticated session.

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