Get SkyBlock Profile Context

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only that output is 'compact AI-readable' and that decoded inventories are optional; the genuinely important cost traits (very large output for raw NBT/member/profile flags, default decodeInventories=true) live in the schema, not here.

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?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource and then the payload contents, with no filler or repetition. It is slightly over-packed with a long enumeration, but every clause carries information.

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 20-parameter tool with no required arguments and no output schema, the description correctly enumerates the returned context and notes that inventories are optional, so an agent knows roughly what comes back. It stops short of explaining identifier selection, the selectedOnly default behavior, or the output-size implications of the raw flags, which is what an agent most needs before calling this.

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 description coverage is 85%, so the schema already explains nearly every parameter, including defaults, bounds, and filter semantics. The description contributes only the high-level list of returned sections and does not clarify precedence among uuid/username/profileId/profileName or how selectedOnly interacts with them. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Fetch one SkyBlock profile') and enumerates the returned member sections (skills, slayers, dungeons, pets, collections, currencies, accessories, inventories), which meaningfully separates it from the plural list tool skyblock_profiles and from skyblock_inventory. It never names a sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing to alternatives such as skyblock_profiles, skyblock_inventory, or skyblock_storage, all of which overlap in scope. With 20 optional parameters and no required identifier, the description gives no help on which identifier combination to pick or when a lighter sibling is preferable.

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