chatgpt_list_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the action (list) and the data returned, but does not clarify that it is read-only, nor does it mention any potential side effects or conditions (e.g., requiring Chrome installed). For a simple listing tool, this is acceptable but could be more explicit.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and lists the included fields. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what is listed and what data is returned. It could explicitly mention that it's a read-only operation (since there are no annotations), but the simplicity of the tool makes this sufficient.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (trivially). Baseline of 4 applies since no parameters exist, and the description doesn't need to add parameter details.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all detected Google Chrome profiles', with specific attributes (Profile Folder ID, Display Name, Email). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like chatgpt_select_profile and chatgpt_list_conversations.

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: to list profiles, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or provide context like 'run before selecting a profile'. It's adequate but lacks explicit guidance on placement in a workflow.

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