get_user_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 usefully discloses that the profile is stored as markdown at a specific path and is auto-populated over time. 'Get' and 'Read this' imply a read-only operation. It does not discuss failure modes or auth, but for a zero-parameter read tool this is sufficient.

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 compact, front-loads the most important information about what the tool returns and when to use it, and adds a useful storage detail without any filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description is complete: it explains what is returned, when to call it, why it matters, where the data lives, and how it is maintained. No output schema exists, but the description adequately conveys the content and format.

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, so the baseline is 4. The input schema is empty and the description does not need to document parameter behavior. No additional semantic meaning is 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 action ('Get'), the resource ('full user profile'), and the specific contents ('light preferences, vibe history, colour preferences, and patterns'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_user_hint and get_favorites by explicitly focusing on the full profile.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Read this before making vibe decisions'. It also explains the purpose ('to personalise recommendations'). It does not mention alternative tools or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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