get_analysis_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'Get' at least conveys that this is a read-only operation with no mutation side-effects, but the description does not disclose error handling, permission requirements, or what happens when the profile is not found. For a simple getter this is minimally acceptable but not rich.

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 a single, short sentence with no filler words. The core action and resource are front-loaded, making it easy to scan and understand instantly.

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?

With only one required parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient for an agent to know it needs a profile_id. However, there is no detail about what the returned 'details' include, no error behavior, and no reference to the obvious sibling list_analysis_profiles, so the context is thin.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the only parameter (profile_id) with type, format, and description, giving 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level context, so the baseline schema-driven score of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('details of a specific analysis profile'), and the word 'specific' signals single-item retrieval, distinguishing it from list_analysis_profiles. This is unambiguous for an agent selecting between getter and list tools.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_analysis_profiles. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or the intended lookup workflow, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema alone.

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