get_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool 'gets' configuration, but does not mention whether it is safe, requires authentication, has side effects, or any rate limits. Critical behavioral context is missing.

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, concise sentence (12 words) that is front-loaded with the core action. Every word is necessary; no superfluous information.

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?

The tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description tells what the tool does but does not elaborate on the structure or format of the returned configuration. It is adequate for a simple get operation but lacks thoroughness.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying what the tool returns ('scanner settings and blocked content categories'), which goes beyond the empty 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 tool retrieves the current safety profile configuration, specifying 'scanner settings and blocked content categories'. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('profile'), distinguishing it from write tools like 'set_profile'.

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 this is a read operation but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'shield_status' or 'audit_log'). It does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, making it minimally adequate.

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