get_person

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

The description adds context about the returned fields (name, email, role, title, timestamps, custom fields, avatar), which is beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not disclose any potential constraints or side effects, but since annotations already indicate safe read operation, 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?

The description is extremely concise: one lead sentence for purpose, one for usage guidelines, and a bullet list of returns. No extraneous information; every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with the 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?

Given the tool is a simple read-by-ID with one required parameter, an output schema, and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is fully complete. It explains what fields are returned and when to use it, leaving no gaps for an AI agent.

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% coverage for its single parameter (person_id), and the description adds no additional semantic details beyond stating it is 'by ID'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides sufficient information.

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 the tool retrieves detailed information about a specific team member by ID, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('person'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'list_people' by specifying that 'get_person' is for a single person while 'list_people' is for browsing multiple.

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 when to use this tool ('when you need detailed information about a specific person') and when to use an alternative ('Use list_people when you need to browse or search multiple people'), providing clear usage boundaries.

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