fetch_person

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool executes an 'st.openPersonPage action' and warns about performance costs of extra parameters. However, it does not mention whether the tool is read-only, authentication requirements, or rate limits, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 concise and well-structured, front-loading the purpose and listing optional data types. The performance warning is clearly separated using emojis and bold text. It wastes no words, but could be slightly more streamlined by merging some phrases.

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 complexity (11 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the main purpose and performance considerations but does not describe the output structure or 'basic information' contents. The nested configuration parameters are left to the schema, making the description adequate but not fully complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by warning about performance impact of setting additional retrieval flags, which goes beyond the schema's descriptions. However, it does not explain parameter formats or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the tool's purpose: opening a person page to retrieve basic information and optionally additional data like experience, education, skills, etc. The verb 'fetch' and resource 'person' are explicit, and the description distinguishes it from sibling tools like fetch_company by specifying the person context.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use additional retrieval flags with a performance warning and recommendation to start with basic info. However, it does not compare this tool to alternative sibling tools (e.g., nv_fetch_person, search_people) to help the agent decide when to use fetch_person over others.

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