User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the tool can return a profile or one of several lists; it does not disclose pagination behavior, auth requirements, or other operational traits beyond what annotations and schema already imply.

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 short phrase with no filler, and the core resource is front-loaded. However, it is a sentence fragment and its enumeration largely repeats the schema enum, so it is concise but not maximally structured.

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?

The schema documents most parameters, and annotations cover the read-only nature of the call. The description gives a high-level return concept but does not explain pagination, the required author permalink, or what a returned profile or list actually contains.

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?

Schema description coverage is 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description enumerates the list enum values, but this duplicates the schema's enum and adds no extra meaning about the author parameter, pagination, or how list selection changes the response.

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 identifies the resource clearly: a user profile or one of its associated lists, and enumerates the list types. It lacks an explicit verb and does not name or distinguish itself from relevant siblings such as whoami or get_feed, but the intended retrieval target is 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not say, for example, when to use whoami instead, or when to request a list rather than a profile, leaving selection entirely to inference from the tool name and schema.

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