get_lawyer_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that contact info is only available for claimed profiles, which is a useful behavioral note. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication, or other behaviors.

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 two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and then listing returned fields. Every part is necessary, with no wasted words.

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 profile retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content (bio, education, etc.), and a conditional (contact info for claimed profiles). It is missing error scenarios, but overall fairly 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 schema already describes the single parameter as 'The Law.AI lawyer profile ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds 'Law.AI ID' but this is redundant; it does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema.

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', the resource 'full profile of a specific lawyer', and the identifier ('by their Law.AI ID'). It distinguishes from siblings like search_lawyers and find_lawyer_by_name by specifying retrieval by unique ID.

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 (need the lawyer ID) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like find_lawyer_by_name for name-based lookup. The sibling list provides context, but the description lacks direct guidance.

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