get_user_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context about Graph API restrictions, stating that only public fields are typically returned without specific permissions. This informs the agent about possible limited output, though it does not cover other behavioral aspects like rate limits or authentication.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The additional note is relevant and kept brief. It is slightly verbose with the line break and 'Note:' but every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

Given an output schema exists and the tool is a simple read operation, the description covers the core purpose and a key limitation. However, it lacks usage guidance for this tool versus its numerous siblings, and the absence of annotations leaves some behavioral gaps. It is adequate but has clear 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameter meanings. It explains that user_id refers to a Facebook user or page ID, and it gives examples of fields ('id, name, picture'). However, it does not explain the exact format of the fields parameter (e.g., comma-separated) or clarify the optionality, leaving some ambiguity.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('public profile info') for a given Facebook user or page ID. It is clear and distinguishes the tool's general scope, but it does not differentiate it from sibling tools like get_page_info or get_my_profile, which could also retrieve profile-like 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The note about API restrictions is about behavior, not usage context, and the description does not mention any exclusions or conditions that would select this tool over its siblings.

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