Need to identify the current user? Retrieve the authenticated Cal.com profile to access user details and verify account information.
Get the authenticated user profile.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get-me"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'authenticated user' implies an auth context. It does not mention potential errors or rate limits, but for a simple profile fetch this is minimal residual risk.
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 entire description is one short sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place and the core action is stated up front.
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 parameterless, read-only profile lookup, the description contains everything an agent needs to select and invoke the tool correctly. No output schema exists, but 'profile' adequately indicates the return value.
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, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema already makes obvious.
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 names a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('the authenticated user profile'), so an agent immediately knows what the tool returns. It is also distinct from every sibling tool, none of which fetch the current user's profile.
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 phrase 'authenticated user profile' gives clear context: use this when the current user's own profile is needed. There are no sibling tools for profile retrieval, so no exclusion or alternative is required.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.