Get person

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

The 'Read-only' statement merely restates readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, earning no credit beyond annotations. The 'Returns' line adds some value by previewing the payload fields, but nothing is said about missing/hidden persons (the isHidden field is surfaced but not explained) or any error behavior.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the Args/Returns structure is easy to scan. The Returns block is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but it costs little and stays brief.

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 annotations and a real output schema, the definition covers purpose, provenance of the ID, and payload shape. Remaining gaps (thumbnail sibling disambiguation, hidden-person semantics) are minor at this complexity level.

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 0% — person_id has no description at all — so the description must compensate, and it does by stating the parameter is a UUID and where to obtain it (list_people or search_people). That is exactly the provenance an agent needs to avoid passing a name string.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get full details for a specific person') and enumerates the fields of interest (name, birth date, photo count), which separates it from aggregate siblings like list_people or search_people. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with get_person_thumbnail, which is the closest ambiguous sibling.

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?

It gives an explicit precondition ('Use this after finding a person via list_people or search_people'), routing the agent from discovery tools to this detail fetch. It does not state when to prefer get_person_thumbnail instead when only an image is needed, so the exclusion side is incomplete.

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