profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that DSNs are password-redacted and that the default profile is indicated, which are useful behavioral traits. It implicitly signals a read-only operation via 'List', but does not explicitly state that no modifications occur. This is better than many descriptions but could be more explicit.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes key details without any fluff. Every word earns its place, and the structure is ideal for quick parsing.

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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema present, the description is fully sufficient. It covers what is listed and notable features (redaction, default). No additional context is needed for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

This tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the 100% schema coverage (trivially) ensures no ambiguity. The description adds no parameter-related info, which 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 states the verb 'List', the resource 'connection profiles', and adds meaningful details: password redaction and default profile indicator. It distinguishes itself from singular 'profile' and mutation tools like 'profile_add' by implying a listing operation.

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 when to use it (when you need to list all profiles), but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as 'profile' (singular) which likely retrieves a single profile. No exclusions or explicit when-not-to-use guidance is given, making it adequate but not exemplary.

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