Function profiling query

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting sampled and optional details, but it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or execution cost.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action and scope. It wastes no words and is appropriately sized given that the schema and output schema carry the detailed structure.

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?

Output schema handles return values and 100% schema coverage handles parameters, so the remaining need is usage context. The description omits when to choose func_profile over func_query, lookup_funcs, or analyze_function, leaving a routing gap for this profiling 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%; fields like addr, count, filter, sort_by, include_lists, and instance_id are all documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb 'Profile' and resource 'functions' and clarifies that output includes summary metrics plus optional sampled details. It does not differentiate from sibling tools such as func_query, lookup_funcs, or analyze_function, so it earns 4 rather than 5.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. It leaves the agent to infer context from the many sibling tools.

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