Get household profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that (nothing about defaults when the profile is unset, freshness, or auth). Its field list is effectively return-value description, which is useful but not a behavioral trait.

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 sentence with the verb first and the returned contents following; no filler, no restatement of the title.

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 no output schema, the field enumeration is the only description of what comes back and it is reasonably specific. It stops short of covering edge behavior (e.g., what is returned before a profile exists), but for a zero-parameter read with rich annotations that is a minor gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description does not invent parameter-like options, which is correct for a no-arg getter.

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?

Specific verb ('Read') plus resource ('household profile') and an enumeration of the fields returned (household size, food preferences, allergies, targets, planning defaults), which lets an agent predict the payload. However, it does not differentiate itself from the very similar sibling get_food_profile, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which of the two to call.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: no mention of when this is preferable to get_food_profile or get_onboarding_state, and no note that it is the read counterpart to prepare_update_profile. The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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