profiles_get_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. The bare 'GET' implies a read-only, non-destructive call, but there is no statement about whether sparse fieldsets or relationship includes affect the response, or what the returned profile looks like.

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?

It is short, but the parenthetical '(GET /v1/profiles/{id})' is a verbatim duplicate of the preceding text and earns nothing. The one sentence present conveys no information beyond the method and path.

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 8 parameters, relationship includes, and sparse-fieldset options, the description explains none of the retrieval semantics, and there is no output schema or annotations to compensate. The structured schema carries the load, but the description itself is inadequate.

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 100% across all 8 parameters (id, include, limit_*, fields_*), so the schema already documents each one. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, which puts it at the baseline for fully-covered schemas.

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 is only the raw endpoint 'GET /v1/profiles/{id}', repeated verbatim in parentheses. It restates what the tool name already conveys without explaining that it fetches a single profile resource or how it differs from profiles_get_collection, profiles_devices_get_to_many_relationship, or profiles_bundle_id_get_to_one_relationship.

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 guidance, no mention of required permissions or scopes, and no routing to sibling tools such as profiles_get_collection for listing. The only implicit signal is the HTTP GET verb, which the agent must infer from the path.

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