get_extension_profiles

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

The description states it lists profiles, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, performance impact, or required permissions. It meets minimal disclosure but relies on the user to infer it is a read operation.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and conveys the essential information efficiently.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain what 'capability profiles' contain (e.g., name, version, status). It does not, so completeness is adequate but not exceptional. The tool is simple with one parameter, so minimal completeness is acceptable.

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 100% with a single boolean parameter that has a clear description in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the parameter schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the action ('List') and the resource ('installed or available PostgreSQL extension capability profiles'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_extension_objects which lists objects within a specific extension.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_extension_objects, list_schemas). The description lacks when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, and does not mention any prerequisites or limitations.

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