Use when someone asks about Jennifer Rebholz's awards, honors, recognition, media coverage, speaking engagements, case results, or notable matters from her career. Returns awards, appointments, media mentions, speaking details, and notable case results.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, stating it returns data. It lists the types of information returned, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. With annotations already indicating read-only, this adds moderate context.
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 perfectly sized for the task. The first sentence front-loads the usage condition; the second specifies return content. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.
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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently informs the agent of what will be returned: awards, appointments, media mentions, speaking details, and case results. No additional context is necessary given the tool's simplicity.
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 has no parameters (100% coverage), so there is no need to add parameter meaning. The baseline is 4, and the description correctly avoids inventing nonexistent parameters.
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 returns awards, honors, recognition, media coverage, speaking engagements, case results, and notable matters. It specifies the resource (Jennifer Rebholz's recognition) and verb (get). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_speaking and get_publications, which may overlap in content, causing potential confusion.
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 explicitly starts with 'Use when someone asks about...', providing clear context for when to invoke this tool. It does not mention when not to use it or offer alternative sibling tools for more specific queries, but the guidance is direct and practical.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of Jennifer Rebholz's professional profile (e.g., bio, biography, career timeline, practice areas). Even the seemingly similar get_bio and get_biography are clearly differentiated by their descriptions: one returns full background, the other returns press-ready versions. An agent can easily select the correct tool based on the user's query.
All tools follow a consistent get_noun pattern (e.g., get_affiliations, get_bio, get_biography). This makes the tool surface predictable and easy to navigate for both agents and developers.
17 tools is slightly above the ideal range of 3-15 for a knowledge base, but the count is justified by the breadth of information covered (bio, career, practice areas, publications, etc.). No tool seems redundant, and the set is well-scoped to a single attorney.
The tool surface covers all major aspects of an attorney knowledge base: biography, career timeline, practice areas, credentials, affiliations, publications, speaking engagements, trials, recognition, and contact information. There are no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of information about Jennifer Rebholz.
