get_agent_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the API key requirement, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose other traits like whether it's read-only, what data is returned, error conditions, or rate limits, leaving significant gaps for a tool with no annotation support.

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 two short sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds a critical prerequisite, making it front-loaded and efficiently structured.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and a key requirement. However, for a tool with no annotations, it lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavioral nuances, making it minimally adequate but incomplete for full agent understanding.

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 has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter documentation in the description. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary information.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('your agent's profile and preferences'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_agent' or 'register_agent' beyond the read vs write distinction, which prevents a perfect score.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Requires API key in credentials'), which provides some usage context. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_agent' or 'delete_agent', nor does it mention any exclusions or specific scenarios for its use.

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