angi_get_pro

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by detailing what the profile includes (ratings breakdown, contact address, awards, etc.) and that it reports the review count but not the reviews themselves. This provides context beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every element adds value, and the structured list of profile contents is efficient. No redundancy.

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 tool with one required parameter, a schema describing both params, and a clear read-only purpose, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what the tool returns, how to interpret the profileUrl, and how to fetch reviews separately. No output schema is needed because the description enumerates the returned fields.

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 covers both parameters with detailed descriptions, including the profileUrl format and the compact flag. The tool description does not add parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Read one Angi pro's full profile', then enumerates the specific fields (business details, service area, hours, etc.). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly pointing to angi_get_reviews for fetching reviews, making the tool's unique role obvious.

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 explicitly states that reviews should be fetched with angi_get_reviews, providing a direct alternative for a specific need. It also implies that this tool is for the full profile, and the phrase 'full profile' clarifies the scope relative to search (angi_search_pros). This is clear when-to-use guidance.

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