get_releaseprofile_by_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the HTTP method and path, which is contextual but not a behavioral disclosure beyond what annotations provide. It does not mention potential 404 errors, authentication needs, or rate limits. With annotations covering the core safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It consists of a single declarative sentence followed by the endpoint and a minimal parameter note. No unnecessary words or redundant details. It is efficient and easy to scan.

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 the tool's simplicity (single parameter, read-only, output schema present), the description is largely complete. It identifies the endpoint and parameter role. It does not explicitly state that it returns the release profile object, but 'Read' and the output schema imply that. The absence of error handling or return details is acceptable given the output schema and the trivial complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only states 'id: Path parameter,' which adds the role but not the meaning or purpose of the ID. It does not explain that the ID refers to a specific release profile, though that is inferable from the tool name. The description fails to provide substantive semantic value beyond the schema's type/title.

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 ('Read') and resource ('ReleaseProfile'), and the HTTP path with {id} clearly indicates this fetches a single record by ID. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_releaseprofile (list all) and create/update/delete operations. The purpose is unmistakable.

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 have a specific release profile ID, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over list_releaseprofile or other get_*_by_id tools. The usage is implied from the resource and path, but not made explicit.

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