get_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds only a field inventory, which the existing output schema already supplies, and says nothing about auth requirements, caching, or whether values reflect live or cached settings.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the most identifying content (name, units, devices, HR zones) is front-loaded. It is under-specified rather than verbose.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and a zero-param read is simple to invoke. The missing piece is the usage context — whether this is meant as a setup/context call — leaving the agent to guess why it would call get_profile instead of the metric tools.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The schema is empty and fully self-explanatory.

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 enumerates the exact contents retrieved — name, unit system, devices, heart-rate zones — which clearly separates it from the daily-metric siblings (sleep, HRV, stress, etc.). However it is a bare noun phrase with no verb, so the retrieval action is only implied by the tool name.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this tool, no mention of it being a prerequisite/context call for other tools, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and the field list.

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