Get person profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the behavioral constraint 'No private contact info,' which clarifies what will be excluded from the response. This adds value beyond the annotations, though it doesn't cover error cases or rate limits.

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 short sentences, completely waste-free. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the privacy note is a useful qualifier that adds context without redundancy.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the return content (profile, interests, recent activity) and a key exclusion (private contact info). It could elaborate on the exact return structure, but given the simplicity, it is sufficient.

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 provides full coverage for personId with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies per the rubric.

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 clearly states it returns a family member's profile with interests and recent activity. The verb 'Returns' is specific, and the resource is well-defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_family_members and get_recent_family_activity.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative references are provided, but the description implies usage for retrieving a specific family member's profile and recent activity. It does not explain when to prefer this over get_family_members or get_recent_family_activity, so guidance is only implied.

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