Get person details

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

Description adds value beyond annotations by listing exact fields returned (biography, birthday/deathday, department, links). Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true, which description does not contradict.

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 sentences, no fluff. The first sentence front-loads purpose and key details; the second provides a critical usage hint. Every part is necessary.

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 get-by-id tool, the description is complete: explains return values (biography, birthday/deathday, department, links) and how to acquire the id. No output schema exists, so the return description is essential and adequately covers what the agent needs.

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% (both id and language have descriptions). The description adds context for the id parameter by explaining it comes from search_people or credits list, which is additional guidance beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'person', and specific fields returned (biography, birthday/deathday, department, links). Distinguishes from sibling tools by noting the id comes from search_people or credits list.

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 tells the agent to obtain the id from search_people or a credits list, providing clear context for use. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the instruction is sufficient and contrasts with related tools implicitly.

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