Get My Basecamp Profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is fully disclosed. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as side effects or data sensitivity. Since annotations carry the burden, a neutral score is appropriate.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text.

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 no-parameter, read-only tool with strong annotations, the description is sufficient to convey the basic purpose. However, without an output schema, it could be more explicit about what 'personal information' includes (e.g., name, email), but the tool's simplicity mitigates this gap.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information because none exist, which is acceptable.

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 it gets personal information for the authenticated user ('me'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like basecamp_get_person (which likely retrieves info for a specific person) and basecamp_whoami (which usually returns identity but not full profile). The title reinforces this.

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?

No guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as basecamp_get_person or basecamp_whoami. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide context for selection, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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