Analyze Creator Profile

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses important behavioral traits: it fetches recent posts, runs multimodal AI on up to 3, synthesizes a profile report, and costs 1 free use then 15 credits per use. This is exactly the kind of context an agent needs beyond the schema.

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 dense but every clause earns its place: purpose, platforms, workflow, report contents, pricing, and sibling alternative. It front-loads the core purpose before supporting details.

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 complex multi-platform analysis tool, the description covers the workflow, output scope, analysis limits, cost model, and the key alternative. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required in the description. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including default values and the 'first 3 analyzed' behavior of limit. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ('Deep-dive') and resource ('a whole creator profile') across eight platforms, and enumerates the concrete workflow and report outputs. It also contrasts itself with find_hook_pattern, making sibling differentiation clear.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('Use for a full teardown when the visuals matter') and names a cheaper alternative for a narrower job ('find_hook_pattern gives you their formula from captions for a fraction of the price'). This gives an agent actionable routing criteria.

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