user_get

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Current user' conveys that the operation is tied to the caller's authentication context, and 'Get' implies a read-only action, but it does not state auth requirements, error behavior, or that no state is changed.

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 entire description is one front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the parenthetical field list efficiently communicates the returned data without unnecessary prose.

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, read-only-looking getter, the description is nearly complete: it names the resource and the returned fields. It could add an explicit note about authentication requirements or potential error responses, but those are largely inferable from the tool's simple nature.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema provides no work beyond its empty properties object. The description's listed output fields add contextual value by showing what the retrieved profile contains.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the exact resource ('the current user's profile'), and enumerates the returned fields, making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling auth_tokeninfo, though the resource scope ('profile' vs token info) is clear.

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?

'Get the current user's profile' implies this is the tool to call when a caller needs their own account/profile data, and it requires no arguments. However, it offers no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparison to sibling retrieval tools like auth_tokeninfo.

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