Read a profile

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: it works without credentials, supports batched accounts, and conditionally includes mutual-follow data only when a connected account is available.

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, well-structured sentence carries all essential information: the resource, the included fields, the multi-account capability, and the credential requirement. Nothing is wasted and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple read-only tool with only two fully documented parameters, the description is complete. It explains the return content, the optional connected-account behavior, and authentication needs, and the annotations cover safety and idempotency traits.

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 both parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the 'one or more accounts' nature of actors and hints at the account parameter, but it does not add substantial syntax or formatting detail 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 names a specific verb and resource ('get profile'), states the exact contents (bio, follower counts, labels, follow status), and clarifies it can operate on one or more accounts. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_author_feed, search_actors, and get_relationships even without naming them.

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 clear context: use this when you need a full profile for one or more accounts, and it notes that credentials are not required. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5, but the usage context is unmistakable.

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