list_profiles

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the read-only safety profile. The description adds context about the scope (personal and business) and account association, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or response format. With annotations covering the key safety aspects, the added value is moderate.

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 sentence that is clear, direct, and free of any superfluous information. It front-loads the action ('List all profiles') and immediately provides the relevant scope and context.

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 that this is a zero-parameter, read-only list operation with no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and scope. It could be improved by mentioning the response format or explicitly noting what data is returned for each profile, but the description is sufficient for straightforward usage.

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 provides no parameter details. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and it correctly implies that no arguments are required.

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 specifies the action (List), the resource (profiles), and the scope (all personal and business profiles associated with the Wise account). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_profile and list_balances, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 implies that the tool is for listing all profiles, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_profile for a single profile. There are no exclusion criteria or alternative tool mentions, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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