sg_myinfo_person

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

The description explicitly discloses 'SHOWCASE MODE (sandbox data)', alerting the agent that all returned information is fake and not suitable for real decisions. Since no annotations are provided, this disclosure carries the full burden and adds meaningful context, though it does not cover authentication or error behavior.

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 a single, efficiently worded sentence followed by a short clarity flag about sandbox mode. Every word adds value with no fluff.

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 simple one-parameter getter with no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields and discloses the mock nature. It could mention whether all fields are always present or how invalid NRICs are handled, but it is sufficient for basic selection and invocation.

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 input schema already provides a complete description of the single parameter `nric`, including test personas, so the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. The high schema coverage (100%) makes the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'SingPass MyInfo', then enumerates the exact data fields (name, DOB, nationality, address, marital status, email, mobile), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like sg_myinfo_cpf or sg_myinfo_passport.

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 description implies this tool retrieves a person's basic profile from MyInfo, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over the other sg_myinfo_* tools or provide any exclusion/alternative guidance. Usage is only implied by the listed fields.

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