Edit my public researcher profile

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds beyond these: it clarifies that only provided fields are updated, an empty string clears a field, and changes are visible to everyone on BugSecure. This enriches the behavioral profile without contradicting 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The action, scope, and key behavioral nuance are front-loaded, and the exclusions are in the second sentence. No redundant phrasing.

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 tool's simplicity (3 optional params, no required fields), the description fully covers what it does, when to call it, and the clearing behavior. An output schema exists to describe return values, so the description needn't repeat that. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description adds critical semantics: 'only the fields given; an empty string clears one' – a behavior not captured in the schema. This goes beyond the baseline of 3.

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 verb (Change), a specific resource (the signed-in researcher's public BugSecure profile), and exactly which fields (bio, website, country). It clearly distinguishes from read-only siblings like get_my_profile and from other mutation tools like update_report_status.

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 explicitly states when to call it: 'Only call this when the user asked' and requires user approval of old/new values. It also says what it cannot do ('Nothing else about the account can be changed here'), implicitly steering the agent to other tools for avatar/email/payout changes.

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