sophos_whoami

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

The description discloses the API endpoint, return data structure, and purpose. It implies safety (read-only) but does not explicitly state that it requires valid authentication or mention error conditions. Given no annotations, it covers the core behavioral aspects but could be more exhaustive.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the endpoint and purpose, and no superfluous words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple, parameterless tool with no output schema, the description is self-contained. It explains the action, return values, and usage context, making it complete for an AI agent to understand 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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning about the return values, which is valuable, but since no parameters exist, it correctly focuses on the output context.

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 calls GET /whoami/v1 to discover the authenticated entity's identity, specifying the returned fields (idType, id, regional API hosts). It distinguishes from sibling tools which are primarily CRUD operations on resources like endpoints, users, or policies.

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 explicitly states the use case: 'Use this to determine which account type is connected and which regional API base URL to use for tenant-scoped calls.' This provides clear guidance on when to invoke this tool, and no alternative tool serves this identity discovery purpose.

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