get_personal_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'get', implying a read operation, but provides no detail on side effects, required permissions, data scope, or output characteristics. This is insufficient for a tool that likely returns sensitive personal data.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential detail, so the brevity is not a virtue. A concise description would still convey purpose and usage in a few words without losing meaning.

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 lack of annotations, no parameter explanations, and no description of the output schema, this description is grossly incomplete. The tool likely returns a set of records, but the agent has no idea what to expect, how to interpret the results, or when to call it. This is far below the minimum viable standard.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are no parameters, but this is acceptable given the absence of parameters.

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 personal records for user' is essentially a restatement of the tool name with minimal added context. It names a verb and resource but is vague about what 'personal records' means (e.g., fitness records, personal bests?) and does not distinguish this from many similar get_* siblings like get_user_summary or get_stats. It barely clarifies the tool's specific function.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context, no exclusions, no mention of what distinguishes it from the dozens of other get_* tools. An agent has no way to know which scenario calls for this tool.

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