get_authorized_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the authentication requirement ('[Requires Login]'), which is a key behavioral trait. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or what specific profile information is returned (e.g., fields, format). The description adds some value but is incomplete for behavioral transparency.

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 and front-loaded, consisting of just one sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and key constraint. Every word earns its place, with no wasted information 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is somewhat complete but could be improved. It mentions authentication but doesn't specify the return format or data scope. For a tool that retrieves user data, more detail on what 'profile information' includes would enhance completeness, though the lack of output schema increases the burden on the description.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter semantics, but this is acceptable given the schema's completeness. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('profile information of the currently authorized user'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_user_profile' or 'get_full_user_info', which might retrieve similar user data but for different users or with different scopes.

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 implies usage context with '[Requires Login]', suggesting it should be used when authenticated, but it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'get_user_profile' or 'get_full_user_info'. The usage is implied rather than clearly defined relative to siblings.

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