list_quality_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It names the returned fields and adds a useful domain fact ('Series are assigned a profile by id'), but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or describe the impact of the detailed flag, although the parameter schema covers the latter.

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 two succinct sentences with no filler. The main action and return fields are front-loaded, and the second sentence provides relevant domain context without bloating the definition.

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 simple collection-listing tool with one optional boolean parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential return fields and a meaningful domain note about series assignment. It is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly, though it leaves usage-versus-alternative guidance to sibling descriptions.

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?

The sole parameter, detailed, has a complete schema description: 'Include the full items and formatItems arrays (large payload).' Since schema coverage is 100%, the schema handles parameter semantics; the tool description adds little beyond the word 'qualities', which loosely maps to those arrays.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List quality profiles with their id, name, cutoff and the qualities each one allows.' It clearly conveys that this returns a collection of profiles with selected fields, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from get_quality_profile or other profile-related siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_quality_profile for a single profile. The only usage signal is the implied 'list all' meaning of the verb, with no when-to-use or when-not-to-use framing.

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