get_agent_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose key traits: the call is '[FREE]' and returns a read-only profile snapshot. It does not say what happens on an unknown or misspelled agent name (empty result vs. error) or whether names are case-sensitive, which matters for a lookup keyed on a string.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and cost tag, then the return payload, then the prerequisite hint — good ordering. The return-field enumeration is a long run-on list, but each item is genuinely informative since no output schema exists.

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 single-parameter lookup with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what it does, what comes back, cost, and how to get a valid input. Only error/edge-case behavior is missing, which is a minor residual gap.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, but the description compensates by identifying agent_name's source ('find agent names' via list_agents), implying it must be an existing agent's name. It stops short of stating exact-match or casing rules.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the full profile of a specific AgentWorld NPC agent') and immediately enumerates what the profile contains, which separates it from neighbors like list_agents, get_agent_trust_pulse, or chat_with_agent.

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?

Gives a concrete prerequisite workflow — 'Use list_agents() first to find agent names' — so the agent knows how to obtain a valid input. It does not state when to prefer this over related lookups such as get_agent_trust_pulse or get_agent_attestations, so there is no exclusion guidance.

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