find_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no matching semantics (substring vs exact, case sensitivity), no statement that it is read-only, no paging behavior. The output schema exists but covers only returns, not call behavior.

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 sentence with zero filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource and immediately bounded by scope. Appropriate size for a three-parameter lookup tool.

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?

An output schema means return values need not be explained, and the description covers the core kind/query concepts. But with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, matching behavior and the limit parameter are left undocumented, so an agent lacks enough to invoke it precisely.

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 does explain two parameters implicitly: 'machine, process, or filament' enumerates the kind values and 'by name' describes query. It says nothing about the limit parameter, leaving a third of the schema undocumented.

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 (find) and resource (profiles) and scopes it to bundled or user OrcaSlicer machine/process/filament presets matched by name. This is more precise than a generic 'find', though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling list_user_profiles or read_profile.

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 phrase 'by name' implies a name-based search, hinting that this is the lookup path versus listing siblings like list_user_profiles. However, no when-to-use condition, prerequisite, or alternative tool is named, so the agent must infer the routing.

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