get_profile

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe read operation. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: the default resolve_inheritance=true merges the 'inherits' chain up to the vendor preset, while false returns only overridden values. Error behavior for a nonexistent preset is not covered.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the inheritance semantics. No wasted wording; the longer second sentence earns its place by explaining the default behavior.

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 exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and annotations cover the safety profile. The inheritance behavior is well covered, but the profile_type dimension and name-scoping semantics are left unaddressed.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains resolve_inheritance and its default well, but says nothing about 'name' (whether it is unique across profile types) or 'profile_type' (process/filament/machine) beyond what the enum 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a preset's settings') and adds that it returns effective values by default. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like list_profiles or audit_profile, and the 'preset' vs 'profile' terminology is slightly inconsistent.

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?

Gives clear guidance on the key decision: resolve_inheritance=true returns merged effective values, false returns only user overrides. It does not say when to prefer get_profile over list_profiles or audit_profile, so there is no exclusion or alternative routing.

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