trash_get_profile

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

No annotations provided; description mentions it returns 'custom format scores, quality settings, and implementation details' but does not explicitly confirm it's a read-only operation or disclose any side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no extraneous information.

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?

While no output schema exists, the description covers the key return elements: custom format scores, quality settings, and implementation details. It could be more detailed about response structure, but is fairly complete for a getter.

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% with descriptions; the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as referencing 'TRaSH Guides' context, but the examples in the schema already clarify usage.

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 'Get' and the specific resource 'TRaSH Guides quality profile', distinguishing it from sibling tools like trash_list_profiles (which lists) and trash_compare_profile (which compares).

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 when needing full details of a specific profile, contrasting with listing or comparing, but does not explicitly state when to use or exclude alternatives.

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