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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds the specific return fields and an example handle format, providing additional behavioral context beyond the structured annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences: the first clearly states purpose and output fields, the second provides parameter context. No wasted words, front-loaded key information. Perfectly concise for a simple read tool.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no further explanation. Annotations cover safety and idempotency. The description and schema together provide complete context for a single-parameter profile lookup 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a description for the handle parameter. The description supplements with an example handle format (e.g., 'jay.bsky.team'), adding meaningful practical guidance beyond the schema's own description.

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?

Description explicitly states it retrieves a Bluesky user profile with specific fields (display name, bio, avatar, follower/following/post counts, creation date) by handle. This is a specific verb+resource combination that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like social.bluesky.feed and social.bluesky.search.

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 mentions lookup by handle and provides an example, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., social.bluesky.feed for posts or social.bluesky.search for searching profiles by query). Usage context is implied but not explicitly delineated.

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