moltbook_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. It mentions the optional parameter behavior but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what the profile data includes. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences that are front-loaded and waste no words. Every part of the text contributes directly to understanding the tool's purpose and usage, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the profile data includes, how errors are handled, or any behavioral traits beyond the basic parameter guidance. For a tool with no structured support, this leaves critical gaps for an AI agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'name' fully documented in the input schema. The description adds marginal value by clarifying the semantics of omitting the parameter ('omit for self'), but it doesn't provide additional details beyond what the schema already covers, aligning with the baseline score.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Get agent profile' with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('agent profile'), making it understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from potential sibling tools like 'moltbook_search' or 'moltbook_feed', which might also retrieve profile-related information, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 implied usage guidance by stating 'Omit name for your own profile,' which suggests when to use the optional parameter. However, it doesn't offer explicit alternatives (e.g., when to use 'moltbook_search' instead) or broader context for when this tool is preferred over others, leaving room for ambiguity.

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