action1_whoami

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns the `/Me` object with account identity and granted permissions, and explains its diagnostic role in 403 scenarios. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the 'Show' wording and whoami semantics imply that, and the description is otherwise transparent about its behavior.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a practical usage note, and a concise 'Returns' summary. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

For a tool with no parameters and an output schema provided, the description covers purpose, when to use it, and what it returns. It is fully complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly focuses on return values and usage context rather than parameters, as there is nothing to document.

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 clearly states the tool shows which Action1 identity the API credentials map to and their permissions. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like action1_list_organizations or action1_get_endpoint, which work with different resources.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this tool first when a call fails with 403, and explains how it diagnoses whether the credential lacks access to the requested organization. This is concrete, actionable guidance that is not present in sibling descriptions.

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