whoami

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

No annotations provided, but the description notes the tool does not reveal secrets and specifies it shows config for active/default or named server. This is transparent for a read-only informational tool.

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?

Two sentences, information-dense and front-loaded. No wasted words, every part adds value.

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?

The description explains what the tool shows (base URL and auth mode), what it does not show (secrets), and scope (active/default or named server). Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Complete for a simple info tool.

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 only parameter 'server' is described as 'the one named in `server`', adding meaning beyond the schema's default value. Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates.

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 shows server configuration (base URL and auth mode) for the active/default server or a named server, distinguishing it from list_servers.

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 advises to use list_servers() to see all configured servers, indicating when not to use whoami, and implies using it to check current server setup.

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