Get Performer Information

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with this by using 'Return.' No additional behavioral context is provided, such as behavior for missing performers or exact-match requirements, which would add value beyond the annotations. A score of 3 is appropriate given the annotation coverage.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only lookup tool, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, read-only annotation, and an output schema), the description sufficiently conveys the core purpose. The output schema likely covers return details, so the lack of return description is acceptable. However, edge-case behavior like missing performers is not mentioned, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter performer_name, and the description does not explicitly explain it. The phrase 'for a single performer' implies the name identifies the performer, but no format, ambiguity, or case-sensitivity information is given. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 states 'Return detailed information for a single performer,' which specifies a clear verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like get_all_performers and get_all_scenes_from_performer. However, 'detailed information' is somewhat vague, so it does not fully capture the scope of the returned data.

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 such as advanced_performer_analysis or batch_performer_insights. The description does not mention any exclusions or conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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