jms_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It is a simple read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not disclose potential details like authentication requirements or response format. It is not misleading, but it adds no behavior context beyond the verb 'Return'.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It perfectly balances brevity and clarity for a simple 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?

For a no-parameter getter with an existing output schema, the description is complete: it states exactly what is returned (current JumpServer user profile) and nothing else is needed. The simplicity of the tool means the minimal description is sufficient.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). There is no parameter information needed, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter details, but none are required.

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 tool returns the current JumpServer user profile, using a specific verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools, but the purpose is unambiguous and the tool name reinforces the meaning.

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. The usage is implied (when the current user's profile is needed), but no alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites are mentioned.

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