get_person_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., permissions, rate limits, or format details). It repeats the read-only nature but does not go beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and ends with a usage condition. Every word is necessary; no irrelevant details.

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 has an output schema and is simple (one parameter, read-only), the description covers the essential usage intent. It does not detail the output structure, but that is handled by the output schema. The description is sufficiently complete for 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already describes the person_id parameter as '人物ID' (person ID). The description adds no extra meaning or usage guidance for the parameter, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 uses the verb '获取' (get) and resource '人物详细信息' (person details), clearly indicating the tool retrieves complete person information. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_person_characters or get_person_image by suggesting this returns full details when needed.

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 '仅在需要获得完整信息时使用' (only use when complete information is needed), giving a clear when-to-use condition. It does not explicitly list alternatives but the context of sibling getters implies when not to use this tool.

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