vortex_profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that – no pagination, no result ordering, no auth requirements – despite the lowered bar that annotations grant.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the optional filter both appear immediately. Nothing wasteful.

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 simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and full annotation coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema it never indicates what a profile entry contains, and pagination/volume behavior is unstated.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does partially by explaining that gameId acts as an optional filter keyed to a 'Vortex game ID', but it gives no format, casing, or validity guidance for the string parameter (1-200 chars in the schema).

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Vortex profiles) with an explicit scope (existing, optional game filter). It does not name any sibling, so an agent must infer it is not vortex_games/vortex_mods, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 'optionally filtered by Vortex game ID' clause implies when the filter is useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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