uprof_list_results

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

Read-only is already declared in annotations, and the description adds the important caveat that entries stamped 'mock' contain synthetic numbers. This tells the agent that some results may not be real data.

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 with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and a data-quality caveat.

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 read-only list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and the mock-data caveat. It is fully sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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, so the schema holds no explanatory burden. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but none is needed, so the baseline of 4 applies.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'stored uProf results' along with the key fields returned. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling reporting and collection tools.

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 explicitly states 'Use to rediscover result_ids from earlier collections,' providing a clear when-to-use scenario. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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