get_profile

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

The description only states 'Get your LinkedIn profile information' with no annotations to supplement. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or the structure of the returned profile data. The burden falls entirely on the description, which is insufficient.

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 efficiently conveys the purpose without any fluff. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

Given there are no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe what information is returned or any other context, leaving room for improvement.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add meaning beyond what the schema already indicates (empty). According to the baseline for 0 parameters, score 4 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'your LinkedIn profile information', making it obvious what the tool does. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on posts, comments, and likes.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is given, the sibling tools cover different operations, so the context of getting profile info is clear. There is no exclusion stated, but the simplicity makes it adequate.

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