get_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does indicate a read-only, public retrieval and specifies the returned fields, but it does not mention behavior around the optional account parameter, authentication, or errors. For a simple non-destructive getter this is adequate, though not rich.

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 well-structured sentence with the action and resource front-loaded. It lists the returned fields and contains no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

Although the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description omits guidance on the only input parameter and does not clarify when to prefer this tool over account_info. An agent cannot confidently decide how to fill the account argument or whether to use this tool versus a sibling.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single 'account' parameter, and the description does not mention it at all. There is no explanation of whether 'account' expects a username, an ID, what null/default means, or how it relates to the current authenticated account. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter guidance.

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 a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('the account's public profile fields'), and enumerates the exact fields included (followers, follows, media count, bio, website). It is clear in what it does, although it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tool account_info.

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 account_info, list_accounts, or other sibling tools. The description implies a public-profile retrieval use case but gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or context for choosing it over alternatives.

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