get_agent_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does signal a non-mutating read that returns capabilities and quota, but says nothing about permissions, behavior for an unknown/unconfigured agent_id, or rate limits. Adequate but thin for a no-annotation tool.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the two things returned. No waste, though it is arguably terse given the missing usage and parameter detail.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must also explain the returned capabilities/quota shape and error cases, which it does not. For a simple single-parameter getter it is minimally sufficient, but leaves real gaps.

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 single 'agent_id' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The phrase 'a configured agent profile' loosely contextualizes the id, but the description gives no format, source, or validation hints, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Read capabilities and quota information for a configured agent profile'), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling lookups like get_antigravity_info and get_codex_info, which appear to be the same operation scoped to specific agent backends.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. the profile must already be configured), and no naming of the sibling get_*_info alternatives. The agent must infer that this is a pre-flight lookup from the verb 'Read' alone.

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