get_build_profiles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and thoroughly discloses behavior: pagination details, search capabilities, return fields (with exclusions), and error handling. It is transparent about being a read-only listing with no side effects.

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 well-structured with a summary, parameter details (Args block), return info, and examples. It is appropriately detailed given the lack of schema coverage, though slightly verbose with redundant list-style parameter descriptions.

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 output schema exists, the description complements it well by mentioning excluded fields, pagination metadata, and error envelope. It covers all aspects needed for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 0%, so description compensates fully. It explains page (1-based, default 1), size (default 25, capped at 100), and search (case-insensitive partial match with examples), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's type/default info.

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 'Get build profiles for the current organization (paginated)', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_build_profile_details by focusing on listing with pagination and optional search.

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 through examples and parameter descriptions, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_build_profile_details or get_distribution_profiles. The context is clear but lacks exclusion guidance.

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