get_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description is minimal ('Get profile') and does not describe the return format, whether partial profile data is returned, if related data (tags, relations, entries) is included, or any potential side effects or required permissions. For a retrieval tool, this is a notable gap in behavioral context.

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, compact sentence in Japanese. It's efficient and direct with no wasted words. However, given its brevity, it doesn't score 5 because it could have added a bit more useful behavioral context while remaining concise.

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?

With a single parameter, no output schema, no annotations, and a minimal description, this is fairly sparse. Given that there is no output schema, the description should explain what is returned. For a profile retrieval tool, the agent lacks information about whether the result includes nested data or related entries, making it incomplete for confident usage.

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 100%, with the 'id' parameter described as 'エントリID (UUID)'. The description adds no new meaning beyond 'get by ID'. The schema already documents the id parameter type and semantics, so the description provides baseline value but doesn't add context about what profile information will be returned for the given ID.

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 'プロフィールを取得 (IDで指定)' (Get profile by ID) uses a clear verb+resource combination, and the parenthetical clarifies it retrieves a specific profile by ID. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_profiles (plural, listing) and create_profile/update_profile/delete_profile. However, the purpose is stated clearly without much elaboration on what constitutes a 'profile' in this domain.

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 gives a clear hint that this retrieves a single profile by ID, which implies it should be used when a specific profile ID is known rather than listing. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like get_custom_entry or get_persona, and no mention of when NOT to use it. The context for usage is implied by the 'by ID' phrasing but not explicitly stated.

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