get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' and 'current authenticated user' imply a read-only operation scoped to the caller, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state authentication requirements, possible errors, or the complete response shape.

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 sentence with no wasted words. The action and target resource are front-loaded, and the example fields are parenthetical and brief.

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?

Given the tool is extremely simple with no parameters and no output schema, this description is mostly sufficient for selecting and invoking it. It could be more explicit about the difference from account-scoped endpoints and list the full return fields, but the core semantics are clear.

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 and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get current authenticated user details'. It clearly indicates the tool returns the caller's own identity information, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like get_account and get_membership, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need details about the currently authenticated user. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, and with many sibling tools such as get_account, get_membership, and verify_token, some ambiguity remains about scope.

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