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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It is clearly a read operation by phrasing ('Return what this site records') and it discloses the shape of the returned content (sourced profile, household, role, voice actors), which is genuinely useful. It says nothing about not-found behavior, lookup exactness, or rate limits.

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?

One sentence, tightly front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the enumerated fields at the end are informative rather than padding.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully enumerates the returned fields. For a simple single-parameter getter this is close to sufficient, though error/empty-result behavior is unaddressed.

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 'name' parameter is documented with an example ('Stewie Griffin'), so the schema does the work. The description adds no further constraint such as exact-match requirements or aliases.

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 (return) and resource (Family Guy character record) and enumerates what the record contains: sourced profile, household, role, voice actors. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby get_person sibling, which is the main gap.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus get_person, get_episode, or the search tools, and no mention of what happens for a non-existent name. Usage must be inferred from the name alone.

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