profilarr_get_openapi_spec

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds the detail that the spec is 'resolved' and returned as a JSON document, which provides some behavioral context beyond the annotation. However, it does not disclose potential size or other nuances, though for a zero-parameter fetch operation this 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's function without any redundant words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, a read-only annotation, and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It clearly states what is fetched and the format, so the agent has all necessary context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (since there are no parameters to describe). The description does not need to elaborate on parameters. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description is consistent with that.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Fetch', the target resource 'Profilarr's resolved OpenAPI 3.1 spec', and the output format 'as a JSON document'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which fetch the OpenAPI spec.

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 clear context that this tool returns the API spec, and there are no overlapping sibling tools, making its usage obvious. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the unique purpose makes exclusions unnecessary.

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