soul_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It lists output content but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what side effects occur, or any access requirements. It also gives no hint about error behavior or response format, so the agent gets minimal insight into what invoking the tool actually entails.

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 concise sentence with an em-dash list, making it easy to scan. It wastes no words, though the cryptic 'SX# passport' term could be clearer. Overall, it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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?

The tool has low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema). The description provides a list of profile attributes but does not fully specify the return structure, the meaning of 'SX# passport', or any edge cases. It is minimally sufficient but leaves room for ambiguity.

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% because the only parameter (agent_id) is described. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema's identifier example, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the resource as an 'Agent identity profile' and lists specific content (trust score, behavioral DNA, character traits, SX# passport), which helps distinguish it from siblings like soul_verify or soul_leaderboard. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'get' or 'retrieve'), so it falls short of the highest clarity standard.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like soul_verify and soul_leaderboard exist, but the description does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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