LinkedIn Profile Get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds context by mentioning 'via the local bridge' and 'normalized raw visible profile sections'. However, it does not explain what 'normalized raw' means or disclose any limitations like rate limits or privacy considerations.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main action. It is efficient but slightly lacking in completeness. A score of 4 reflects good conciseness with minimal waste.

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 presence of an output schema and three parameters with zero description, the description is too brief to provide adequate context. It fails to explain how to invoke the tool, what the output schema contains, or how it relates to the sibling tool.

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 input schema has zero description coverage for its three parameters, and the tool description does not mention or explain any of them. The agent receives no help understanding how to use 'sections', 'username', or 'profile_url' beyond their names and types.

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 verb 'Return' and the resource 'normalized raw visible profile sections via the local bridge'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'linkedin_profile_dossier' by specifying that it returns sections rather than a full dossier.

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 the sibling 'linkedin_profile_dossier' or any other alternatives. There are no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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