Browse the profile directory

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: only opted-in accounts are visible, ordering is by new or recently active, and instance scoping is the default. This is useful for setting agent expectations, though it does not mention pagination or output shape.

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?

Three short sentences with the most important scoping and ordering information front-loaded. The final sentence about finding people without a recommendation engine adds context without bloating the description.

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 read-only browsing tool with four optional parameters, all schema-documented, the description covers the key decision factors: who is included, ordering, and scope. It does not detail the result shape, but the concept of browsing a directory of accounts makes the expected output reasonably clear.

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 documents all four parameters. The description reinforces the order and local-only semantics, but it does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 says this tool lists accounts that opted into discoverability, sorted by newest or most recently active, and scoped to an instance. That is a clear resource and behavior, though the verb 'browse' is only in the title and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling search or follow-suggestion tools.

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?

It gives situational color: scoped to your own instance unless you ask for the wider network, and positioned as a way to find people without a recommendation engine. However, it never says when to prefer it over alternatives like search or get_suggested_follows, and it offers no explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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