list_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List', which implies a read-only action, but provides no additional details such as default limit, pagination behavior, or what response to expect. The verb is already implied by the tool name, so the description adds minimal transparency beyond the structured data.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 is a simple list operation with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally viable. However, the absence of an output schema and any behavioral annotations means the overall context is incomplete—an agent would not know the structure of the returned data or default behaviors such as sorting or default limit.

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 the schema already fully documents all three parameters (limit, filterProfileType, filterProfileState). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for schema-heavy documentation.

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 'List provisioning profiles' uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('provisioning profiles'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools that list other entities (apps, builds, beta groups, etc.). It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or related tools for different profile-related operations. While the resource name implies the intended context, it lacks explicit usage direction.

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