Kasra Get Profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-style profile retrieval and lists the returned fields, which adds useful context. However, it does not disclose whether authentication is required, whether the call is strictly read-only, or any side effects beyond the obvious 'get' semantics.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and easy to scan. The bilingual Persian/English repetition is somewhat redundant, but it is not bloated and every substantive point appears early.

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 getter with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient: it names the target resource and the expected data categories. However, it leaves the optional 'reason' parameter unexplained and provides no guidance on when this tool should be preferred over sibling tools, so the context is not fully complete.

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 only parameter, 'reason', has 0% schema description coverage and is entirely absent from the tool description. With no explanation in either the schema or the description, an agent cannot determine what value to pass, why it exists, or what effect it has on the request.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Get current user profile" / "دریافت اطلاعات پروفایل کاربر جاری", and enumerates the contents (name, personnel ID, department, role, recent login history). This is clearly distinct from the sibling report/list tools such as kasra_get_daily_report or kasra_get_messages.

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 no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or sibling routing. The only implied usage is derived from the tool name and the phrase 'current user profile'.

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