spawn_me

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral detail that the tool uses the 'connected Spawn agent token' and specifies exactly what is returned. While it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or free of side effects, that is reasonably inferable from the 'whoami' nature, and the description adds meaningful context beyond the tool name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately communicates the tool's essence and return format, making it highly scannable and concise.

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 simple identity-lookup tool, the description is highly complete: it says what the tool does, what token it uses, and what it returns. The only optional parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description could add a note about behavior when no token is available, but the low complexity does not demand it.

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 input schema covers the only parameter (`projectDir`) with a clear description of its default behavior, giving 100% schema coverage. The main description does not mention `projectDir`, but since the schema already fully documents it, the description does not need to compensate. Baseline 3 applies.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('connected Spawn agent token'), and explicitly specifies the return shape `{ userId, username }`. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like spawn_list_games or spawn_status, which focus on other aspects of the Spawn environment.

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 intended usage is implied: use this tool when you need the current user's identity. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. No sibling tool appears to offer the same functionality, so the lack of exclusions is not problematic, but the description stops at stating what it does.

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