get_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, yet the description adds real context beyond them: no cloud request, no cache write, the returned JSON shape (status, source, data.profile fields), the guarantee that credentials and plaintext account IDs are never returned, and status=error behavior when disconnected.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the core purpose leads, followed by behavioral guarantees, error handling, and the sibling routing hint. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return payload (status, source, data.profile contents) and error semantics. Combined with the routing guidance, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries nothing and the description need not add parameter meaning. Baseline of 4 applies; no syntax or format gaps exist because there is nothing to pass.

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 (Read) and resource (minimal metadata for the already-connected local account) and explicitly disambiguates from a medical/demographic profile. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like query_body_measurements or query_daily_activity immediately.

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 explicit when-to-use (read connected account metadata), a fallback for the disconnected case (get_connection_status can establish/check first), and a routing alternative (query_daily_activity for activity totals). Nothing is left to inference.

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