get_operator

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'live profile', suggesting real-time data but omits important traits: the mutation status (likely read-only), authentication needs, rate limits, or what response format to expect. This is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool safely.

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, efficient sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it might be too terse, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should cover return format, side effects, and usage notes. It only states the action and parameter identifier, leaving significant gaps for the agent to fill.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It does specify 'by codename', indicating the parameter identifies the operator. However, it does not explain the format, constraints, or how to obtain valid codenames. The addition is minimal, not fully compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'One operator's live profile by codename.' clearly states the verb (get), resource (operator), and the retrieval key (codename). It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like get_leaderboard, which lists multiple operators rather than a single 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't explain when to use get_operator vs get_leaderboard, or note any prerequisites or contexts. The distinction is only implicit through the tool name and description.

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