List agent profiles

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds only the default sort order (created_at descending, then id descending), which is marginally useful but omits richer behavioral details such as pagination behavior, filtering interplay, or the effect of include_stats. The ordering note is the sole addition beyond structured fields.

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, efficient sentence with no waste. However, it is not front-loaded with the tool's purpose, which is absent entirely.

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 an 8-parameter list tool with no output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is incomplete: it omits what the tool returns, how pagination works, the role of required orgID/projectID, and when to use it. It addresses only default ordering.

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 75%, so most parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds the default ordering (created_at desc, id desc), which is not explicit in the schema, but it doesn't explain the sort parameter's override behavior or how it interacts with the default. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema already covers most semantics.

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 never states that this tool lists agent profiles; it only describes the ordering of items. The tool's actual purpose must be inferred from the name and title, which the description merely restates in behavioral terms. It is a tautological restatement rather than a clear verb+resource statement.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like agents_list or profiles_get. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.

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