Show tunable options of a profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool reads a profile's source and extracts tunable options, and the examples convey that the output is a list of parameter names. It doesn't explicitly state read-only semantics, but 'fetches' strongly implies a non-mutating operation, and no side effects are suggested.

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 that front-loads the core action and result, then quickly gives examples and a usage note. Every phrase adds value, and there is no wasted wording.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains what it does, what it returns, and how to use the result. The absence of error-handling details or return format specifics is minor given the simplicity of the operation.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'profile' with a description and example values. The tool description adds context about the parameter's role (used to fetch that profile's source), but this is largely implied by the purpose and doesn't provide additional semantic depth beyond the schema.

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 a specific action ('fetches a profile's source') and its result ('lists the parameters it exposes'), with concrete examples of the parameters. It distinguishes itself from siblings like plan_route and compare_profiles by focusing on retrieving tuning options rather than routing or comparison.

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 tells the agent to pass the fetched parameters to plan_route via profile_options, making the tool's role in a workflow clear. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the connection to plan_route provides strong contextual guidance.

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