get_person

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the burden. 'Current data' usefully signals a live/current snapshot rather than historical information, and 'Get' implies read-only behavior; however it does not disclose edge-case behavior or authorization expectations.

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?

One focused sentence that front-loads the operation and resource, then identifies the keying parameter. No filler or repetition.

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 tool with an output schema present, the description supplies the essential selection context. The main omission is routing to sibling get_person_relations, but that gap is already reflected under usage_guidelines.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by clarifying that the lone integer 'id' is the KRS person id, not a generic identifier. It does not explain how to obtain the id, but for a single required parameter this is a meaningful semantic addition.

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?

States a specific action ('Get current data') on a specific resource ('a person appearing in the KRS') keyed by person id. This distinguishes it from sibling get_person_relations, which addresses relationships rather than base person 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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies the tool is for retrieving current person data by id, but does not mention alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer selection.

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