vikunja_get_current_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and 'authenticated' indicates the need for valid credentials. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error conditions, response shape, or authentication specifics beyond what the name implies.

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, well-formed sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('Get') and includes relevant context ('authenticated', 'configured credentials') efficiently.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently states what it does. However, it could be more specific about the exact fields or settings included in the returned object, though this is minor for a zero-parameter getter.

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?

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are none to describe. It does hint at the output (profile and settings), but the schema is empty, so this dimension is not a concern.

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 retrieves the authenticated user's profile and settings, which is a specific verb+resource pairing. The name 'current_user' and the qualifier 'for the configured credentials' distinguish it from other user-related endpoints in the sibling list.

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 usage when you need the current authenticated user, but it does not explicitly state when to avoid alternative user-listing tools or provide exclusions. Without explicit alternatives, the guidance remains implicit rather than directive.

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