get_profile

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It mentions returning 'full details' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, or performance implications. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and scope without any 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 tool with one simple parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It specifies what is returned (full details, extraction parameters, steps). Could be slightly improved by noting the return type (e.g., profile object), but the current level is adequate.

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 100% with profile_id described. The description adds value by stating that the tool returns 'all extraction parameters and steps', which clarifies the output context beyond the schema. This helps the agent understand the parameter's role in retrieving comprehensive data.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'full details of a specific espresso profile', specifying scope 'including all extraction parameters and steps'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_profiles (listing) and get_profile_schema (schema only).

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 use when needing full details of one profile, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_profiles for summaries or get_profile_schema for structure. No when-not or exclusions are provided.

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