get_my_profile

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the scope limitation: 'Reports only your own record, never anybody else's.' This provides context beyond the annotation, confirming the tool is a safe, self-only read. It doesn't describe return format, but the output schema covers that.

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 extremely concise, with two well-structured sentences. The first sentence states the exact resource and fields; the second explains purpose and scope. No filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, self-profile read tool with an output schema, the description is fully complete. It states what is returned (user ID, name, login ID) and the scope (own record only). The presence of an output schema covers return-value details, so nothing essential is missing.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). With no parameters to document, the baseline for 0-param tools is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it doesn't mislead.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves the caller's own Canvas identity (user ID, name, login ID). The verb 'Get' plus 'YOUR own' explicitly scopes the resource and distinguishes it from any other user-lookup tool, such as list_users.

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?

Provides explicit use case: 'useful when a tool needs your Canvas user ID or NetID.' Also clarifies it reports only the caller's record, implicitly guiding against using it for other users. This is strong practical guidance with no alternatives mentioned but clearly scoped.

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