adobe_list_product_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it filters API responses to type=='PRODUCT_PROFILE' due to Adobe's API limitation, and provides rate limits (5/min per client, 100/min globally). This is valuable insight beyond a simple listing 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 concise and well-structured: a clear one-line purpose, followed by necessary behavioral notes and parameter details. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary fluff.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, filtering logic, rate limits, and parameter semantics. No significant gaps remain.

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?

The schema provides only a default value with no description. The description's Args section adds meaning: 'Page number to fetch, zero-indexed (default: 0)', which is essential for correct usage. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'List product profiles available for license assignment' with examples (Acrobat Pro/Standard), using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like adobe_list_users by focusing on product profiles.

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 tool's purpose for license assignment is clear and the context implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, though the filtering note provides helpful context about the API's behavior.

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