Get the account profile

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

The description discloses that reading the contact page is an additional request and that setting include_contact to false saves a request, which is behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations. It does not contradict any annotation.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and includes the only relevant behavioral note about the optional parameter. There is no wasted text.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is fully sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. It specifies what is read, mentions the optional contact page, and relies on the schema for parameter details.

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 input schema already provides full coverage (100%) with a clear description for include_contact. The tool description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a clear verb ('Read') and a specific resource ('the name, the subjects and the contact values of the signed-in account'). This unambiguously differentiates the tool from siblings like hisinone_list_documents or hisinone_get_achievements, which operate on different resources.

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 clarifies it targets the signed-in account, giving clear context for when to use it. While it does not explicitly say 'use this for profile, not for other resources', the sibling names make the alternative uses obvious, so context is clear without explicit exclusions.

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