list_profiles

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'data coverage' gives useful context about the output. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or whether it makes external calls. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not highly transparent.

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 two short sentences: the first states what the tool does, the second provides usage context. Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with the verb and resource first. No fluff or redundancy.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently states the return content ('profiles with their data coverage') and provides strong usage context ('call this first'). Given the low complexity and zero params, the description is complete and leaves no major gaps.

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 the schema is empty. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific details because none are needed. The mention of 'data coverage' is not parameter-related but enriches the overall understanding.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('OSCAR profiles') and adds the scope 'with their data coverage'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_channels and describe_database, which target different resources. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Call this first when you do not know which profile or date range is available.' This makes the primary use case clear. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the 'call this first' placement strongly implies it is the entry point for discovery.

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