Автозагрузка: получить профиль (v1, deprecated)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the deprecation status, which is a behavioral trait (tool may be removed). No other behavioral details are provided, so it adds some value beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that states deprecation and the profile purpose. It front-loads critical info (deprecation) and wastes no words.

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 is deprecated and has no parameters or output schema, the description sufficiently tells users it's a v1 profile and to use v2. For a deprecated tool, this is adequate context. It does not describe return format, but that's not critical here.

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 the description does not mention parameters, which is expected. Per guidelines, 0 parameters sets a baseline of 4. The description adds no param info but none is needed.

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 states it's a profile for autoload v1, but does not explicitly say it retrieves or gets the profile. Combined with the title 'получить профиль' it's implied, but the description alone is a noun phrase rather than a clear action statement.

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 explicitly marks the tool as deprecated and directs users to use autoload_get_profile_v2 instead, providing clear guidance on when (not) to use this tool and specifying the alternative.

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