list_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result includes each printer's default profile alongside the saved profiles, which is non-obvious return-shape information, but it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or completeness of the list.

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 clause with no filler. It is a noun phrase rather than a full statement, so it reads slightly terse, but nothing is wasted.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys the result contents but leaves the filter value format and any result ordering unspecified. It is adequate, but an agent could still call it with the wrong kind of printer identifier.

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% for the single 'Printer' parameter, so the schema only gives a nullable string with no hint of whether it is a name or an ID. The description adds only that the parameter is optional and acts as a filter — useful but insufficient for the agent to construct a valid value.

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 names the resource precisely ('all remembered print profiles', 'the default profile of each printer'), which is far more specific than the bare name. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as list_printers or describe_printer, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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 parenthetical '(optionally for one printer)' implies the filter use case, so partial guidance exists. There is no statement of when to prefer list_printers or describe_printer, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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