get_me

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it implies a read-only, zero-argument lookup with no side effects, which is correct for a 'get me' tool. However, it says nothing about authentication requirements, whether the call can fail for an unauthenticated session, or what fields the returned user includes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word (verb, scope qualifier, resource, product version) 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 trivial zero-parameter lookup this is close to adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives no hint of the shape of the returned user object, which an agent would need to use the result.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the baseline rule there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already shows. No ambiguity exists.

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?

States a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('the currently authenticated Basecamp 2 user'), and the 'currently authenticated' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from sibling get_person, which requires an explicit identifier. It is not tautological and an agent can tell what it returns, though it never names a sibling outright.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, but the phrase 'currently authenticated user' strongly implies the intended case (identifying the caller) versus fetching an arbitrary person via get_person or list_people. Guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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