getCurrentUser

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a read-only operation. The description merely repeats 'Show', adding no extra behavioral context such as response format, auth requirements, or side effects. With annotations present, the description fails to add any value beyond what the annotation already provides.

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 extremely terse—just three words. While it is concise in the sense of few words, it is under-specified for a tool with two parameters and no other context. It lacks any structure, front-loading of key constraints, or elaboration. This is under-specification, not effective conciseness.

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 two parameters (one required), no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description is woefully incomplete. An agent cannot determine how to specify the format or include options, what response to expect, or when to choose this over getMyAccount. Essential information for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for the parameters (format and include). The description does not compensate by explaining what these parameters mean, how they should be used, or their allowed values. Given the low coverage, the description must supply this meaning and fails entirely.

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 'Show current user' clearly states the action (show) and the resource (current user). It is unambiguous about what the tool does. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'getMyAccount', which likely serves a similar purpose. A clear purpose but no sibling differentiation means a 4.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getMyAccount' or 'getUser'. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is left to guess which tool is appropriate.

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