mdl_users_get_person

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond this — no note on what a person record contains, whether the ID must exist, or error behavior for unknown IDs.

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 words is not conciseness but under-specification; the sentence is front-loaded but omits everything an agent needs. It fails to earn its place as useful content.

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 read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the minimum required is met only barely. The description omits the meaning of the parameter and the identity of the returned resource, leaving gaps that the schema does not fill.

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 single parameter person_id has 0% schema description coverage and the description provides no explanation of its accepted form (integer or string pattern), despite the schema allowing both. The description does not compensate for the documentation gap, though the name is fairly self-evident.

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?

"Users: get person" essentially restates the tool name (mdl_users_get_person) with a category prefix, making it tautological. It does not distinguish this person lookup from siblings like mdl_users_get_person_credits or mdl_search_people, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mdl_users_get_user_info or mdl_search_people. The only hint of context is the "Users:" prefix, which implies a domain but gives no selection criteria.

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