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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the concrete endpoint (GET /api/v2/persons/{id}), which is modest extra context, but says nothing about not-found behavior, permissions, or response shape.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the endpoint mapping. No filler, no redundancy.

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 trivial one-parameter read tool with annotations covering the safety profile and a fully documented schema, the definition is essentially complete. Only a brief note on not-found handling or return shape would improve it, and no output schema exists to cover that.

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 single id parameter is fully documented in the schema as required. The description only restates 'by its id', adding no format, range, or sourcing guidance beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single person (contact) by its id') plus the underlying REST endpoint, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling read paths pipedrive_list_persons or pipedrive_search_persons.

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 phrase 'by its id' implies the precondition for use (you must already have a person id) and indirectly routes id-less lookups elsewhere. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over list_persons/search_persons or what to do if the id is unknown.

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