agent_profile

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read-only operation with no side effects, but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. Adequate for a simple getter, 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. First sentence lists what it retrieves, second sentence gives use cases. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return content and typical usage. Could be slightly more precise about 'how many interactions are remembered,' but overall complete for a simple tool.

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?

No parameters in input schema, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). Baseline score of 4 applies as description need not add parameter details.

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 gets the agent's identity and stats, listing specific fields (API key info, tier, contribution count, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like agentweb_health and agentweb_leaderboard by focusing on personal profile data.

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 provides use cases ('how am I doing on AgentWeb?' or checking quota), giving clear context for when to use. However, no discussion of when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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