whoami

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation without side effects. However, it does not explicitly state that no mutation occurs, nor does it mention authentication requirements or rate limits. The simplicity of the tool (no params) mitigates the need for extensive disclosure, earning a 4.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No extraneous information. Perfectly concise 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?

The description adequately specifies what the tool does but lacks detail on the output format. Since there is no output schema, the description should hint at the structure of returned data (e.g., 'returns a JSON object with fields...'). The phrase 'verified Okta identity and granted scopes' is somewhat vague, leaving the agent to guess the exact fields.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty object). The baseline for no parameters is 4. The description does not add parameter-level detail, which is unnecessary here.

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 the connected OIDC user's verified Okta identity and granted scopes. The verb 'show' and specific resource 'verified Okta identity and granted scopes' distinguish it from siblings like 'userinfo' or 'token-details', which might show different aspects.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or which sibling tools cover similar ground (e.g., userinfo, token-details).

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