neurover_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description contributes nothing beyond them — no indication of what the 'page' contains, what the returned data looks like, or what openWorld access implies.

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?

It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness: a single fragment with no verb and no front-loaded actionable information. Length is not the problem; absence of content is.

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?

Two undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations explaining behavior leave the agent with essentially no usable information. For a tool with pagination and account scoping, the definition is wholly inadequate.

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?

Both parameters (page, account) have 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the full burden and it explains neither. There is no hint about pagination semantics, what 'page' indexes, or what form 'account' takes.

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?

"Страница профиля пользователя" only restates the tool name (profile) and adds the word "page"; it never says whether the tool fetches, renders, or returns profile data. An agent cannot tell from this how it differs from siblings such as neurover_account_overview or neurover_account_settings.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no mention of any alternative among the many account-related siblings. The agent has nothing to route on beyond the bare word 'profile'.

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