mdl_users_get_person_credits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on what data is returned, whether credits are paginated, or any auth requirements.

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?

It is a single short fragment with no padding, so it is concise. However, the brevity comes at the cost of substance rather than from efficient packing of information.

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 one-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description should at least explain what "credits" contains and how the identifier is interpreted. It leaves both the input semantics and the return value entirely unspecified.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description says nothing about person_id — its accepted formats (integer vs. pattern-constrained string) or whether it refers to a user or a person entity. The description does not compensate for the documentation gap.

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 credits" essentially restates the tool name with a namespace prefix. It does not clarify whether "credits" means a filmography/acting credits or an internal credit balance, nor does it distinguish this from siblings like mdl_users_get_person or mdl_titles_get_credits.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the closely named mdl_users_get_person or mdl_titles_get_credits. The only hint of usage is the implicit "Users:" namespace grouping, which is not real guidance.

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