get_profile_v2

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers none. 'Get all profiles' doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, how results are returned (e.g., paginated, filtered), what permissions are required, or any rate limits. For a tool with 6 parameters that presumably supports complex queries, this lack of behavioral context is inadequate.

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?

While technically concise with only three words, this is under-specification rather than effective brevity. The description lacks necessary structure—it doesn't front-load key information about what the tool actually does beyond the obvious, nor does it provide any context about parameters, behavior, or usage. Every word should earn its place, but here the words don't provide enough value.

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 complexity (6 parameters with enums, no output schema, no annotations), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'profiles' are in this context, how results are structured, what filtering/sorting/pagination options exist via parameters, or how this differs from sibling profile retrieval tools. For a multi-parameter query tool, this minimal description leaves critical gaps.

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 description provides zero information about any of the 6 parameters, despite 0% schema description coverage. Parameters like 'folder', 'search', 'tag', 'sorterField', 'sorterOrder', and 'page' are completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving their purpose, format, and usage ambiguous. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 'Get all profiles' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'get_profile_v2' without adding meaningful specificity. It doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_profile__id_' (get single profile) or 'get_deleted_profiles_v2' (get deleted profiles), nor does it specify what kind of profiles or what 'all' means in context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools for retrieving profiles (e.g., 'get_profile__id_' for single profiles, 'get_deleted_profiles_v2' for deleted ones, 'get_workspaces__wid__profiles' for workspace-specific profiles), the description fails to indicate when this bulk retrieval tool is appropriate versus more targeted options.

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