list_profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a useful behavioral trait—'Never contacts Bitbucket'—which is not covered by annotations. This adds context about the tool's execution characteristics without contradicting the annotations.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the primary action and scope. The additional clause about Bitbucket is short and valuable, adding no waste. It is exemplary in brevity.

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 parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description fully conveys what the tool does and its key behavioral constraint. There is no missing information an agent would need to invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain any. The schema is empty and fully covered. Per the guideline, 0 params gets a baseline of 4, and the description adds no parameter-related information, which is appropriate.

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 action ('Lists') with a clear resource ('every configured local profile') and its scope ('and its defaults'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from remote operations by saying 'Never contacts Bitbucket', which differentiates it from siblings that might access Bitbucket.

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 a clear context for when to use this tool: when you need local profile information and want to avoid network calls. It implicitly excludes alternatives by the 'Never contacts Bitbucket' clause, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or conditions for choosing them, so it falls short of a 5.

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