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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'public' scope and enumerates what is returned, which is useful context, but provides no additional behavioral details like rate limits or error behavior.

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, both front-loaded: the first states what is returned, the second tells the agent where to get the slug. No filler.

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?

Complete enough for a single-parameter read tool whose annotations cover safety and whose schema documents the input. No output schema exists, so the description appropriately enumerates return fields, though it could note omission behavior (e.g., if a teacher has no upcoming events).

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% and the schema already documents the slug parameter with an example ('mona-ring'). The description reinforces the slug source but adds no new format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Get one person's public profile') and enumerates the returned fields (bio, location, practices, years of experience, upcoming events). This distinguishes it from get_event and get_community among the siblings.

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 instructs how to obtain input: 'Use with a slug from search_teachers or from a get_event teacher link.' This names two concrete sources and routes the agent to the correct sibling tool.

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