Get your Juggle family profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond that: children's PII is gated strictly on include_kids, and sensitive fields (phone numbers, emergency contacts, house instructions) are never returned on any view — a privacy invariant worth stating. What's missing is any note on auth/session requirements or failure behavior.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the field enumeration earns its length because there is no output schema. The first sentence is very dense (a long comma series) and the exclusion clause is repeated in spirit by the schema, so a little trimming is possible — but nothing is padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry return-value disclosure, and it does so thoroughly, including the include_kids gating and the negative guarantee about sensitive fields. Gaps are minor: no note on authentication prerequisites or what an error/empty profile looks like.

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% and both parameter descriptions are already detailed, so the 3 baseline applies, but the description does add a small amount: it reinforces that include_kids is a hard gate ('ONLY when include_kids is true') and that no view choice can surface the excluded sensitive fields.

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?

States a specific verb ('Show') plus the exact resource (Juggle family account profile) and enumerates the returned fields — name, email, service area, membership status, unread count, job stats, saved addresses with ids, pets, kid count. The mention that saved address ids are 'needed to post a sit' also signals how this differs from directionless siblings like juggle_post_job.

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?

No explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives; the reader must infer that this is the entry-point read for account context and prerequisites for posting a sit. The 'needed to post a sit' hint implies usage but does not state it as guidance.

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