Preview company-facing profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that this is a read-only fetch operation, lists the returned content, and notes that login is required. This is meaningful context beyond the tool's name and title.

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. It front-loads the core purpose, lists the returned data fields, gives the intended use case, and states the auth requirement. 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?

This is a simple, parameterless, read-only preview tool with no output schema. The description covers what the tool returns, why it should be used, and its auth requirement. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 parameter-semantic coverage is fully satisfied by the empty schema. The description appropriately avoids inventing parameter details; the baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter information to provide.

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 a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('founder/company-facing rendering of your WAAS profile'), and clarifies this is the same data as the in-app Preview iframe. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like waas_get_profile or waas_update_profile, which deal with raw or editable profile data.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: after edits, to QA without asking the user to click Preview. It does not explicitly list exclusions or name alternative sibling tools, but the trigger condition is concrete enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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