llm_share_profile

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

The description explains it exports a specific file and prepares it for upload, with return path and instructions. However, it does not disclose whether the local file is modified or any permissions needed. Since no annotations are provided, more details on safety/read-only behavior would be beneficial.

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 three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose, each adding value. No redundant or missing elements.

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 simple parameterless tool with output schema, the description provides complete context: what it does, how it works, and what the return value is.

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?

Tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline is 4 because description need not add param info; none required.

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 exports and prepares the learned routing profile for community sharing, using specific verb 'Share' and resource 'learned routing profile'. It distinguishes well from siblings like llm_import_profile.

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 mentions usefulness for publishing routing patterns but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like llm_import_profile. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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