get_user_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds critical behavioral context: the endpoint is deprecated/removed for newer app registrations, and the followers field was separately removed so no follower count is reported. These details go well beyond the annotations and materially affect expected 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 three tightly written sentences. It leads with the core purpose and then immediately provides availability caveats and missing-field details. Every sentence adds distinct value with no filler.

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 read-only profile lookup with full schema parameter coverage and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the missing operational context: deprecation status, registration limitations, returned fields, and the absence of follower counts. No output schema exists, and the description sufficiently clarifies expected output.

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 fully documents both user_id and response_format. The description does not add any parameter-specific syntax, constraints, or format meanings beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get any Spotify user's public profile (display name, profile image).' It is clear what the tool does and what data is returned, but it does not name or explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as get_user_playlists_by_id or other profile-related 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 an important when-not condition: it was removed by Spotify's February 2026 Web API changes and is unavailable for newer app registrations. This helps an agent avoid calling it in unsupported contexts. However, it does not suggest alternative tools or explicitly describe when to use it versus other profile-adjacent tools.

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