get_my_agent_profile

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

With no annotations, the description is adequate but minimal. It indicates a read operation without side effects, but lacks details on authentication requirements beyond mentioning 'configured API key', rate limits, or data freshness expectations. For a simple profile fetch, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and method, followed by a list of retrieved data. Every sentence adds value; no unnecessary 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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description fully explains its purpose and the type of information returned. It covers what an agent needs to know to invoke 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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is complete. The description does not need to add parameter meaning, and the baseline for zero parameters is 4. No additional context is required.

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 specific verb 'Fetches' and identifies the resource 'AgentFi agent profile'. It lists the contained information (identity, wallet, chains, tier, policy, billing usage), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform different actions like swaps or deposits.

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 states 'Use this to confirm the active identity, wallet, supported chains, tier, policy, and billing usage', giving clear guidance on when to use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the purpose is straightforward and no alternatives exist among siblings.

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