zulip-mcp

get_own_profile

Retrieve your own Zulip user profile to verify authentication and identify the connected user.

Instructions

Get the authenticated user's own profile.

Use this to verify the connection is working and to see who is authenticated. This is the first tool to call when setting up.

Returns: JSON object with user profile: user_id, email, full_name, etc.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_own_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the return format (JSON object with user_id, email, etc.), adding some value, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like authentication requirements, side effects, or rate limits. The return description is helpful but not exhaustive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise at 5 lines, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by usage guidance and return details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 params, output schema exists), the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and return format. It is complete for an agent to understand when and how to use the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). Per guidelines, a no-parameter tool baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information because none exists.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get the authenticated user's own profile', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_user and get_message by focusing on the authenticated user's profile.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly advises using this tool to verify connection and to see who is authenticated, including 'This is the first tool to call when setting up.' While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it, the guidance is clear and context-rich for a simple tool.

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

Deploy Server