Get A Single Person

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety. It adds context about the API endpoint and return format (JSON object), but these are not behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. No contradiction.

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 four sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes necessary details like required parameters and API reference. It is efficient with no redundant information, but could be slightly more compact without the explicit endpoint URL.

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 simple get-by-ID tool, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required parameters, and return type. No output schema exists, but the description states it returns a JSON object. Given the low complexity and rich annotations, it is adequately 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter is already documented. The description lists the two required parameters (company_id, person_id) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 single Person object and fetches full details of a specific Resource Planning record by identifier. The verb 'returns' and the resource 'Person object' are specific. While there are many sibling tools, none directly overlap with this scope, so differentiation is implicit.

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 explicitly states 'Use this to fetch the full details...' which provides clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, which would be beneficial but is not critical given the tool's singular purpose.

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