get_human

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the type of information returned (skills, reviews, availability), which is helpful. However, it does not mention error handling, authentication, or any caveats about the returned data (e.g., only active humans).

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 no filler words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key 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 one-parameter get tool without an output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose and enumerates key fields. It could be improved by referencing the required human_id or contrasting with search_humans, but it is adequate.

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 schema already describes the sole parameter human_id with 100% coverage, so the description need not add parameter information. It does not, but the schema suffices.

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 the action ('获取' get) and the resource ('人类服务者的详细信息' detailed information about human service providers), and specifies the content (skills, reviews, availability). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_humans (search) and get_agent_identity (agent, not human).

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 the tool is for retrieving a specific human's details, but it does not explicitly say when to use it over search_humans or mention any prerequisites. The context is clear but no alternatives are mentioned.

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