get-my-profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining that the profile resource has navigation properties that can be requested separately, and that $expand can be used to inline them. It also transparently flags the tool as beta, which is helpful information for an agent.

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 moderately sized but front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The following tip is concise and actionable, and the reference to 'methods exposed by profile' is a helpful pointer. It is not overly verbose, though it could be trimmed slightly for maximum clarity.

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 no output schema, the description reasonably focuses on usage rather than return format. Annotations handle the safety profile, and the description explains navigation properties and expand/select usage. The only minor gap is the slight inconsistency between 'for a given user' and the subsequent 'signed-in user' clarification, but given the tool name, this does not significantly impede correct usage.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description goes beyond by providing practical guidance for the expand parameter (e.g., '$expand=skills,projects') and clarifies that select is for ordinary fields. This enriches the parameter semantics beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 (retrieve) and the resource (the properties and relationships of a profile object). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get-current-user by noting it is 'richer', which aids the agent in selecting the correct tool. The first sentence is specific and actionable.

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 directly compares with get-current-user ('a richer object than get-current-user') and gives concrete advice on using $expand with an example. It also points to the 'methods exposed by profile' for further reference. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' list, but the comparison is sufficient for most selection scenarios.

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