canvas_get_current_user

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

The description repeats the readOnlyHint annotation by saying 'Read-only' but adds useful context by specifying 'authenticated user' scope. It does not disclose error handling, rate limits, or response format, which is acceptable given the annotation and simplicity.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It states the action and the read-only nature directly 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, read-only tool, the description is sufficient for basic understanding. It doesn't describe the return payload, but the simplicity and annotations compensate. A brief mention of returned fields would make it complete.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Per the guidelines, a zero-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information.

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 'Read the authenticated Canvas user's profile' with a specific verb (read) and resource (authenticated user's profile). It distinguishes from sibling write tools like canvas_create_module or canvas_write_page.

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 intended usage is implied by the name and description – if you need the current user's profile, this is the tool. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are given, and it doesn't differentiate from canvas_read_api which could also be used for reading.

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