get_vault_person_context

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only notes the tool is 'dbt mart-backed' but omits whether it is read-only, potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a tool with 4 parameters.

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, front-loaded sentence with minimal waste. However, it could be restructured to include key details like parameter role or usage hints without increasing length significantly.

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 presence of an output schema, return values are covered. However, the tool has 4 parameters and no behavioral or usage guidance in the description. While the output is hinted (decisions, risks, open loops), the description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly without extra context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema already provides; thus it does not improve parameter understanding.

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 it returns dbt mart-backed person context including specific items like decisions, risks, and open loops. The verb 'Return' and resource 'person context' are precise, and the tool name distinguishes it from siblings like get_vault_entity_context.

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 implies use when needing person context, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_vault_entity_context) or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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