Get Person Profile

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotent annotations by disclosing PII sensitivity, required access tiers, purpose confirmation, minor restrictions, and the name-based matching limitation of konkurs_eksponering. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: an aggregated summary, a detailed caveat about name-based matching, an explicit non-screening warning with alternative, and access restrictions. Slightly long but dense and well-structured with front-loaded core purpose.

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?

With an output schema already present and strong annotations, the description fully covers access control, data limitations, alternative tools, and matching caveats. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to decide on and invoke the tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds contextual meaning by explaining the purpose parameter's audit-trail role and the source formats for person_id, reinforcing and expanding on the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Aggregated person profile' followed by concrete contents (name, birth year, active roles, shareholdings, AML/PEP hits). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly stating it does NOT run PEP/sanctions screening and directing to firmaradar_check_aml_pep.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'does NOT run a PEP/sanctions screening' and names the alternative tool. It also states access requirements (search_full_enabled tier, F10.11 purpose confirmation, minor blocking), giving the agent clear conditions for use.

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