spa.me

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation by saying 'Returns', and lists exactly what is returned, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only, nor does it mention any prerequisites, side effects, or error conditions. This is adequate but not enriched.

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 is front-loaded with the primary action and then lists the return fields. Every word earns its place—no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the description need not explain return structures. It lists all the profile fields returned and is sufficiently informative for a simple retrieval tool. It could be more complete by noting whether any arguments are required, but given the low complexity, it covers the essential context.

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 input schema has a single generic 'arguments' property with no descriptions and 0% schema coverage. The description does not compensate by explaining what parameters are expected, or even whether any arguments are needed beyond an empty object. For a simple getter, this is a minor gap, but it leaves the agent uncertain about invocation details.

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 that the tool returns your remembered profile and enumerates the exact contents (nickname, mood, favorite treatment, visit count, recent visit history). It uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('remembered profile'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like spa.remember or spa.checkin.

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 implies usage when you need your own spa profile, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, so the guidance is merely implied rather than explicit.

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