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

With readOnlyHint already declaring this a safe read, the description still adds real value: it discloses the performance trade-off of details=true ('slower') and warns that omitting limit returns everyone ('can be large'). It does not discuss auth or rate limits, but the core behavioral caveats are surfaced.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and each sentence carries distinct information (filtering, output shape, filter semantics, endpoint). It is information-dense rather than padded, though the run-on filter examples make it slightly heavy to parse.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it does: it specifies the default fields (id, first_name, last_name, photo path) and the details=true shape keyed by field_id, both of which are essential for an agent to correctly consume the result.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it: it explains that filter keys are profile field_ids or special keys and gives two concrete examples (tag_contains, Status option ranges), which the schema's generic 'additionalProperties: string' cannot convey. It also clarifies the details field's output effect.

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 ('List people in the church database') and immediately qualifies scope with optional filtering vs pagination. An agent can distinguish this list-and-filter endpoint from single-entity siblings like breeze_get_person without opening either schema.

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?

Gives clear context for when and how to use it: use filters keyed by field_id, and it routes the agent to breeze_list_profile_fields to discover those keys. It stops short of explicit when-not or alternative statements (e.g., versus breeze_list_volunteers), so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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