threads_get_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns a JSON string with profile fields and implies read-only behavior via 'Fetch,' but it omits details about authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. This is a gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise and well-structured: one sentence stating the action, followed by a 'Returns:' line listing output characteristics. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 (no parameters) and the existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It clarifies the return format and fields, but could briefly mention authentication expectations or error behavior. Overall, it is sufficient for a straightforward profile-fetch operation.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter-level details because there are none, but it does list the returned fields, which is relevant context though not strictly parameter semantics.

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 tool fetches the authenticated user's Threads profile information, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like threads_get_posts and twitter_get_profile by explicitly naming Threads and focusing on the user's profile.

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 use case is implied by the phrase 'authenticated user's Threads profile,' but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. It does not mention alternatives or situations where a different tool should be preferred, such as twitter_get_profile for Twitter profiles.

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