get_chess_player_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'public profile', hinting that no auth is needed, but does not disclose any other behaviors such as rate limits, error responses, or that it is a read-only operation.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action, resource, and parameter. Every word is purposeful and there is no redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the core purpose. However, it could add more context about what the profile includes or any necessary prerequisites, making it adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only restates the username parameter with 'by username', adding no extra meaning about format, case sensitivity, or usage nuances beyond what the schema already shows.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('public profile for a Chess.com player'), and the parameter ('by username'). It also distinguishes from sibling get_chess_player_stats by using 'profile' rather than 'stats'.

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 the tool's purpose but does not explicitly state when to use it over get_chess_player_stats. While the word 'profile' differentiates it from 'stats', there is no direct guidance on alternatives or when not to use it.

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