get_my_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states it returns the profile, implying a read operation and an authentication requirement, but does not disclose behavior on unauthenticated requests, potential errors, or data completeness. For a simple read-only tool this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists the returned fields. There is no fluff or redundant phrasing, making it optimally concise.

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 has no output schema, the description's list of fields provides sufficient information about the return value. It does not mention error conditions or authentication prerequisites, but these are implicitly conveyed by the tool name and description. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to call it 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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameters. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to explain parameters that do not exist.

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 the specific verb 'Return' with a clear resource ('authenticated user's full profile') and enumerates the fields (name, headline, about, experience, education, skills). This unambiguously distinguishes it from siblings like get_job_details and the update_* tools, leaving no doubt about its function.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving the current user's profile, which is clear context given the sibling set. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but since it is the only profile-fetching tool, the usage context is evident and no exclusion is necessary.

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