Get LINE User Profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds failure behavior context (ambiguous 404) and return structure, going beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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: first states purpose, second states usage conditions and return type. No wasted words, information is front-loaded.

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?

Describes return shape and failure behavior, but does not explain the 'oa' and 'response_format' parameters. With 3 parameters and no output schema, the description should cover all parameters to avoid confusion.

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 33% (only user_id described in schema). The description mentions user_id but adds no new info beyond the schema. Two parameters (oa, response_format) are not addressed in the description, leaving their purpose unclear.

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 'Fetch a LINE user's profile' with specific fields (display name, picture, etc.). The tool is distinct from siblings which are about rich menus, sending messages, and other LINE management tasks.

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?

Explicitly states conditions: user must have added the bot, not blocked it, and consented. Also explains failure behavior (404 returned as Thai explanation). Does not name direct alternatives, but sibling tools are clearly different.

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