config_profile_get_config_profile_by_uuid

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no auth requirements, no error behavior for unknown UUIDs, no note that this is a read-only operation. It is a bare restatement of the route.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, but the content is essentially redundant: the route line, the sentence, and the 'Tags' footer repeat each other. Concise but not economical.

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 read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least hint at what a config profile contains or what errors are possible. None of that is present, leaving the agent with only the route.

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?

Only one parameter (uuid) with 0% schema description coverage. The name 'uuid' and its format/pattern make the meaning self-evident, so the description's '{uuid}' route placeholder adds nothing but the parameter is also hard to misinterpret. Baseline for a trivial single-param tool.

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 verb+resource ('Get config profile by uuid'), and the HTTP method/route line reinforces it, but it is a near-tautology of the tool name and offers no differentiation from siblings like config_profile_get_computed_config_profile_by_uuid or config_profile_get_config_profiles.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no indication of when the plain profile is preferable to the computed variant or the list endpoint. The agent must infer all routing decisions.

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