user_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns data for the 'authenticated user', implying authentication required and read-only behavior. It lists return fields, which adds transparency. However, it does not explicitly declare no side effects or discuss rate limits, but for a simple getter, the information is adequate.

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 sentences plus a 'Returns:' line, no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose, and the rest adds specifics. Every sentence earns its place.

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 parameterless tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the key return components (role, preferences, device list, per-device overrides). There are no edge cases or missing details needed for a profile retrieval tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it does not mislead. It is consistent with the empty input schema.

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 clearly states the purpose with specific verb 'Get' and resource 'user profile', and lists the contained fields (role, preferences, per-device overrides). It distinguishes itself from siblings like `get_preferences` (which likely only returns preferences) and `admin_list_users` (which lists other users).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for retrieving the current user's profile but lacks exclusionary guidance or mention of related tools like `set_preferences` or `admin_set_user_role`. The purpose is clear enough to infer usage, but no direct comparison is made.

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