get_my_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It explains the critical caveat about Facebook's field restrictions for personal tokens and the behavior for page tokens, which is exactly the kind of behavioral nuance an agent needs. No contradictions.

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, immediately states the endpoint, and front-loads the purpose. The caveat sentence is essential and well-placed. No redundant information.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the key contextual caveat about token types. The output schema presumably documents the return shape. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 describes the 'fields' parameter but the description only mentions that fields are restricted, not how to format or use the parameter. Given schema coverage is 0% in the description, adding an example like 'fields=id,name' would help. Baseline 3 because the schema itself documents the parameter with a default.

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 retrieves the profile of the authenticated token's identity and maps it to the Graph API endpoint GET /me. Sibling tools like get_user_profile and get_page_info are distinguishable because this tool specifically targets the token owner's identity, not a specified user or page.

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 implies usage for the authenticated identity and implicitly contrasts with page tokens, but it does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to alternatives like get_user_profile or get_page_info for other identities. The token-based scoping is clear, but exclusions are absent.

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