kchat_get_user_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and says only 'Get'. It does not confirm the operation is read-only, whether any permissions or visibility rules apply to viewing another user's profile, or what 'detailed' encompasses. That leaves the agent guessing on behavior for a people-data lookup.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter read tool, though the terseness is also the source of its gaps.

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-param read call this is close to sufficient, and no output schema exists so return values needn't be documented. However, with zero annotations the description should at least confirm safety and clarify what profile fields come back; 'detailed profile information' is vague about scope.

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 100% and the single user_id parameter is fully typed with UUID format and pattern, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no meaning beyond it — no hint on where to obtain a valid user_id or that IDs come from kchat_get_users.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (detailed profile information) scoped to 'a specific kChat user', which implicitly separates it from the plural kchat_get_users sibling. It stops short of naming that sibling, but an agent can still tell the single-user lookup apart from the list tool.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should call this when it already has a user identifier and needs profile detail. No explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives (e.g., kchat_get_users for discovery) are provided.

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