get_profile_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. 'No draft or send' reinforces that this read triggers no writes, and 'bounded' hints at the post_limit cap, but neither adds much beyond the annotations and no return/rate/permission detail is given.

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 short clauses with the key framing ('Preferred outreach read') front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though terse to the point of under-specifying required inputs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the read-only nature is clear. But with six-sibling overlap (get_profile, get_profile_posts, search_profile) and 0% param coverage, the description does not do enough to disambiguate inputs or tool choice for an outreach read.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning but does not. 'Profile details' and 'bounded authored posts' faintly gesture at profile and post_limit, yet the required 'account' parameter and the account-vs-profile distinction are never explained, leaving the agent to guess.

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 specific read: combining exact profile details with bounded authored posts. This implicitly distinguishes it from siblings like get_profile (details only) and get_profile_posts (posts only) by framing it as the combined 'outreach read'. The verb is implied rather than explicit, but the resource and scope are clear.

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?

'Preferred outreach read' implies the context (outreach preparation) in which this tool should be chosen, and 'No draft or send' sets a boundary against action-taking siblings. However, it never names alternatives such as get_profile or get_profile_posts, nor states an explicit when-not condition, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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