Get Person

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that family relationships are included in the result, but does not discuss missing-person behavior, permissions, or pagination; the output schema also exists, reducing the need for return-shape detail.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. It communicates the core action and included relationship data immediately.

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 read-only annotations, full schema descriptions, and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: it identifies the resource and the included relatives. A small gap remains because it does not distinguish this tool from find_people or state that it targets a single already-known person.

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%, and both parameters (tree, person_id) are documented in the schema with UUID formats and sources. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get a person's details') and scopes it to immediate relatives (parents, partners, children, siblings). This partly distinguishes it from get_ancestors/get_descendants and find_people, but it never names those siblings or explicitly says it is for a single known person rather than a search.

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?

Usage is only implied: the schema shows it requires a tree and person_id, which suggests the person must already be known. The description gives no explicit when-to-use vs find_people or when-not guidance, and no prerequisites or alternatives are named.

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