get_persona

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions authentication as a requirement, which is useful, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what the return format is, how errors are handled, or any side effects. The verb 'get' implies non-destructive behavior, but it is not explicitly stated.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the authentication requirement. There is no redundant or extraneous information—every word 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action and the auth prerequisite. However, it does not mention what the returned person object contains or whether the tool can return null/error for missing IDs, which would improve completeness for a 'get' operation.

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 100% coverage with a description for the single 'id' parameter ('Person ID to retrieve'). The description reinforces this with 'by their ID' but adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 'Get a single person by their ID' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_personas, create_persona, update_persona, and delete_persona. It also clarifies the singular nature versus list operations, and the term 'person' differentiates it from the 'usuario' tools.

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 states a prerequisite ('Requires authentication') but offers no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer get_persona over list_personas or get_me, so usage context is only implied by the tool name and the action described.

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