moltbook_get_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the return content ('karma, followers, recent posts/comments'), which adds value. However, it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether authentication is required, rate limits, error conditions, or if it's read-only (implied but not stated). For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded. The first sentence states the purpose clearly. The Args and Returns sections are structured efficiently, with each sentence earning its place by providing essential information without waste.

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 annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is partially complete. It covers the parameter semantics well and outlines return values, but lacks details on authentication, errors, or behavioral constraints. For a read operation with implied complexity (profile data), it's adequate but has clear gaps.

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 description adds substantial meaning beyond the input schema. The schema has 1 parameter (name) with 0% description coverage and no details. The description explains: 'Agent name to look up. Omit for your own profile.' This clarifies the parameter's purpose, optionality, and default behavior, fully compensating for the low schema coverage.

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's purpose: 'Get an agent's profile.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('agent's profile'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_post or follow. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other get_* tools (e.g., get_comments, get_post), which slightly reduces specificity.

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 provides implied usage guidance: 'Omit [name] for your own profile.' This suggests when to use the tool for self vs. others. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternatives (e.g., vs. get_post for post details), and doesn't mention prerequisites like authentication.

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