get_person

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

With no annotations, the description declares 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose what happens if the personId is invalid, or any other side effects. It adds some context about the return value but lacks depth.

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 sentences, 30 words, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence provides value with no 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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states purpose, output content, and read-only nature. Lacks mention of error handling or typical failure modes, but overall adequate.

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 the schema already documents the single parameter adequately. The description doesn't add significant meaning beyond repeating 'PersonId' and indicating the output includes the primary alias id, which is not parameter-related.

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 'Get a person by PersonId', with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes the output from other tools by mentioning the primary alias id, which is unique among siblings.

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 guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_people' or 'rock_get'. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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