Person's Profile

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

With readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false already declared, the description adds real value by clarifying that these read-like POST requests do not publish to social platforms and that the call consumes paid API credits gated by confirm=true. It stops short of describing rate limits, error modes, or what happens on retry.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core capability and return fields before the operational constraints. No filler, every clause carries 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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates well by enumerating the returned fields, plus it covers the credit/confirmation gating. Missing only explicit sibling routing guidance for a tool sitting among many LinkedIn and other-platform profile tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains url, account, and confirm. The description only reinforces the confirm=true requirement, adding marginal meaning beyond the structured fields; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieves) and resource (a person's public LinkedIn profile) and enumerates the returned data fields. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as linkedin_company_page or linkedin_post, which cover different LinkedIn entities.

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?

Gives clear context for use: only publicly available incognito-visible data, and requires confirm=true for the approved credit-consuming call. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., linkedin_company_page for organizations) or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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