Get user persona

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description aligns by saying 'Read' and 'Returns'. The description adds useful behavior detail about the merged view and per-line scope, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is two sentences with no fluff. It packs purpose, usage timing, and return behavior into a compact, readable format. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the annotations and schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns. No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 only parameter 'scope' has a full enum with descriptions, and the description explains the default behavior ('merged view by default') and what merging means (global base persona + current project overrides). This adds meaningful context to the schema definition.

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 reads the L3 user persona markdown, a stable summary of preferences, and distinguishes it from writing tools like persona_save. The verb 'Read' and the specific resource 'L3 user persona markdown' make the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance: 'Call at the start of a new session to load the user profile and preferences.' This is concrete and actionable, and the read-only nature implicitly contrasts with writing tools like persona_save.

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