profilWer hinter Stalsoft steht: Kurzprofil von Dr. Alex Stolz, akademischer und industrieller Werdegang, Lehrtätigkeit, Erfahrungsjahre, Sprachen, Einsatzgebiet und Profil-Links (ORCID, Scopus, DBLP).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the scope of content (career, teaching, languages, links) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like response format or limits. Given the annotations, this is adequate but not rich.
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 sentence but packs in a lot of detail with a clear front-loaded lead ('Wer hinter Stalsoft steht'). It could be slightly trimmed, but every piece of information serves a purpose in conveying the tool's content. Overall efficient and well-structured.
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 informational tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns: a short profile with specific sections. There are no gaps that would leave an agent uncertain about invoking this 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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns rather than parameter syntax. Baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools is appropriate, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter noise.
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 that the tool provides a short profile of Dr. Alex Stolz, including academic and industrial career, teaching, experience, languages, and profile links. This specific verb+resource pairing distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'publikationen' (publications) or 'kontakt' (contact), making it unmistakable.
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 opening phrase 'Wer hinter Stalsoft steht' sets clear context for when to use this tool (when wanting to know about the person behind the company). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the content makes the usage obvious in relation to the sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
All seven tools have clearly distinct purposes: FAQ, content retrieval, contact, profile, publications, focus areas, and site search. Even though 'website_durchsuchen' and 'inhalt_abrufen' both touch content, their functions are complementary and well-described, so an agent can easily choose correctly.
Tool names mix noun forms (faq, kontakt, profil, publikationen, schwerpunkte) with verb-noun compounds (inhalt_abrufen, website_durchsuchen). This inconsistency breaks a predictable verb_noun pattern, but the German names remain descriptive and readable.
With 7 tools, the surface is well-scoped for a personal consulting website. Each tool serves a meaningful purpose and none feels redundant or excessive; the count aligns with the domain's needs.
The tool set covers all major aspects of the consultant's site: profile, expertise areas, publications, FAQ, contact, and full-text search. There are no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of user queries, and the search tool acts as an effective entry point to find any missing details.