pipedrive_get_person

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction, but no extra value. For a read-only get, this is adequate.

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?

Single sentence, no verbose phrasing, front-loaded with key action. Every word contributes to 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?

No output schema, but the description says 'detailed information', which is vague. Given the tool is a simple get with strong annotations, the description is minimally acceptable. Could be improved by indicating what kind of details are returned.

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% with clear descriptions for all three parameters (id, include_fields, custom_fields). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies since schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Clearly states 'get detailed information about a specific person by ID.' The verb and resource are unambiguous. Among siblings, many get tools exist, but the resource is specific to 'person', so differentiation is natural. Lacks an explicit distinguishing feature beyond the resource name.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pipedrive_get_person_emails or pipedrive_list_persons. Usage is implied: use when you need details of a single person by ID. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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