bookshelf_get_qualityprofile

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the 'single' and 'by id' scoping detail. It doesn't mention behavior like 404 handling or response format, but with the read-only annotation and output schema, the baseline transparency is acceptable.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and target. There is no wasted text or redundant information.

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 get-by-id operation with one clearly-typed parameter, an output schema, and read-only annotation, the description is sufficient. No additional return-value explanation is needed because the output schema exists.

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 schema defines only 'id' as an integer with no description. The description's 'by id' clarifies that this parameter is the lookup key, but adds little beyond the parameter name and schema. Since coverage is 0%, the description only partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('qualityprofile') with a clear scope ('single ... by id'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_qualityprofile by emphasizing retrieval of one specific profile.

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 phrase 'by id' implies it is for retrieving a single profile when the id is known, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_qualityprofile or get_qualityprofile_schema. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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