get_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'Fetch' implies a safe read operation, but it does not disclose potential errors (e.g., if query_id is not found), permissions required, or that it returns no side effects. It is minimally transparent enough for a simple read, but lacks richer context.

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, focused sentence that immediately communicates the essential action and target. No unnecessary words or repetition; every part 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It clearly states what is fetched and for which entity. However, it could be more helpful by noting how it relates to list_profiles (e.g., 'use this for a single profile, not list_profiles'), which would tie it into the broader tool set.

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 only provides the parameter name and type, with no description (0% coverage). The description adds semantic meaning by stating 'for one query id', clarifying that query_id is the identifier of the query whose profile is fetched. This compensates for the schema gap, though it does not specify format or origin of the id.

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'), names the resource ('the full profile'), and scopes it to 'one query id', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_profiles which lists multiple profiles. The purpose is immediately clear and 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 usage by indicating it operates on a single query id, suggesting it should be used when you need one specific profile rather than a list. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings like list_profiles or mention when not to use it, so guidance is only implied.

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