get_profile

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states the output fields (name, email, timezone, workspace info), implying a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it does not mention authentication, rate limits, or other potential behaviors, but for a profile getter this is sufficient.

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, well-structured sentence with 14 words. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no redundancy. It is concise without being terse.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It clearly states what the tool returns, and for a simple profile retrieval, no additional context is needed. The sibling tools are sufficiently differentiated.

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 schema coverage is 100%. Baseline is 3, but the description adds value by listing the returned fields, which helps the agent understand what data will be retrieved. This goes beyond mere parameter description.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'user's Toggl profile', clearly stating the purpose. It lists returned fields (name, email, timezone, workspace info) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_recent_entries' or 'get_projects' which focus on different data.

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 implicitly indicates when to use it – when you need the user's profile information. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. For a no-parameter, straightforward tool, this is acceptable but not optimal.

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