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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description reinforces this with 'read-only context' and the once-after-sign-in cadence, but adds little beyond that; with an output schema present it needn't describe the return shape.

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?

Two tight sentences: content first, invocation cadence second. No filler, no repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

A zero-param, read-only snapshot tool with a full output schema and complete annotation coverage needs only to say what it returns and when to call it, both of which are present. Only a hint about whether it is a prerequisite for other Proofable calls is absent.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline for a no-argument tool 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return the signed-in Proofable profile') and enumerates the payload (proof index, agents, permissions, verifier summary), which is far more than a restatement of the title. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from siblings that also surface this data, such as proofable_agents_list or proofable_verifiers_catalog.

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?

'Use once after sign-in' gives a genuine timing cue for invocation. It offers no exclusions or named alternatives, so an agent must infer that agents_list/verifiers_catalog are the scoped-down substitutes when only one slice is needed.

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