linkedin_person_profile

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

With no annotations, the description covers credit costs (50-100), premium cost increase, webhook delay, and expected fields (with uncertainty). However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it disclose potential rate limits or error conditions.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and then details each parameter. It includes a note about uncertain return fields, which slightly reduces conciseness but is honest. Overall well-structured.

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 lack of output schema, the description attempts to describe return fields but admits uncertainty. It covers parameters well but omits error handling, rate limits, and pagination details. Adequate but with gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds valuable context: id is a slug, type='profile' differentiates modes, premium impacts cost, webhook trades timeliness for success. This enriches the schema definitions.

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 tool scrapes LinkedIn person profiles using a profile ID and returns full profile data including experience, education, and about sections. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_company_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?

The description provides explicit guidance on using the profile ID slug, required type='profile', and options like premium and webhook with their trade-offs. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the distinction from company/profile mode is clear.

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