Get Quality Profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'List quality profiles' without mentioning pagination, filtering, sorting, or response format. The input schema implies pagination parameters (page, limit, cursor), but the description does not explain this 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?

The description is extremely short (three words) and front-loaded, but it is too brief to be useful. Conciseness should not sacrifice essential information; here, it lacks substance for a tool with many parameters and no annotations.

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?

Given the tool has 11 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not describe what a quality profile is, the expected output, or how to use pagination parameters, leaving the agent without necessary context to use the tool effectively.

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% and the description adds no information about any of the 11 parameters. It does not mention the required 'app' parameter or optional ones like 'page', 'limit', 'detail', etc. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List quality profiles' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (quality profiles). Among many sibling tools like get_quality_profile, create_quality_profile, etc., it uniquely identifies itself as a listing operation, differentiating it from singular get or mutation tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that 'get_quality_profile' retrieves a specific profile, nor does it explain scenarios or prerequisites for using this list operation.

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