get_config_profile_by_uuid

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description reinforces this with '[READ]' and the HTTP verb/path, adding light context but no behavioral detail such as error behavior on unknown UUIDs or whether the profile is resolvable vs. computed.

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 short lines with zero waste, and the read/endpoint annotation sits compactly after the purpose. It is front-loaded and easy to scan, though the minimal content limits how much the structure can accomplish.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description could have said what a config profile contains or how it differs from the computed variant; it does not. For a simple single-parameter getter whose annotations carry the safety profile, this is adequate but leaves a real ambiguity unresolved.

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 description coverage is 0% and there is one parameter, but the schema itself gives full typing (uuid format with a strict pattern), and the parameter name plus the phrase 'by uuid' is self-explanatory. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('config profile by uuid'), matching the tool name exactly. However, it does not distinguish this from the closely named sibling 'get_computed_config_profile_by_uuid', leaving the agent to infer the difference between a raw profile and a computed one.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_config_profiles' (list) or 'get_computed_config_profile_by_uuid'. The agent must infer that this single-UUID fetch is appropriate when a specific profile identifier is already known.

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