getProfile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Fetch' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, and 'authenticated user' signals an auth requirement, but the description does not explicitly state that no side effects occur, that authentication is required, or what happens on auth failure. This is adequate but leaves some behavioral gaps.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause adds information: the action, the resource, and the returned fields. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter getter, the description is nearly complete: it states the resource, the ownership scope, and the returned fields. There is no output schema, so the description does the work of explaining the return value. Minor gaps remain around explicit auth requirements and error behavior, but nothing prevents an agent from invoking this 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is little for the description to clarify. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description appropriately adds context by identifying which user profile will be returned, which is meaningful beyond the empty schema.

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') and a specific resource ('the authenticated user's profile'), and enumerates its contents (name, email, balance, preferences). This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinguishes it from the unrelated sibling tools such as listVoices, createAgent, and generateTts.

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 clearly implies this is for retrieving the current authenticated user's profile, providing clear context. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or compare it to alternatives, but no sibling tool appears to serve a similar profile-fetching purpose, so explicit exclusion is unnecessary here.

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