Get Person
get_personRetrieve a single person (client) by their ID, including their Client Compass data.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| person_id | Yes | The UUID of the person to retrieve |
client-compass
by com.numbru
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so description must convey behavior. States it retrieves data but does not mention error handling, permissions, or side effects. Lacks detail on what 'Client Compass data' entails.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single concise sentence front-loading key info. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Adequate for a simple retrieval tool with one parameter. Covers purpose and key data included. Minor gaps: no mention of error handling or response format.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with description of person_id. Description adds output context but no additional parameter meaning, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states verb 'retrieve', resource 'person (client)', and scope 'by ID' and 'including Client Compass data'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_people and batch_create_persons.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implied usage: use when needing a single person by ID. No explicit when-not or alternative guidance provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have distinct purposes (create, retrieve, chat). However, generate_compass overlaps with the automatic compass generation in create_person and batch_create_persons, potentially causing confusion about when to use it separately.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_person, get_chat_messages, update_profile). The naming is predictable and clear, with no mixing of conventions.
Tool Count5/5
11 tools is appropriate for a client management system with profile, chat, and compass features. The scope is well-defined and each tool serves a clear function without unnecessary bloat.
Completeness3/5
The tool set supports create, read, and search operations for people, but lacks update and delete functionality. Also, there is no explicit tool to update a client's compass after creation, and chat management is limited to send and retrieve without edit/delete.