search_people

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

No annotations are provided, putting the full burden on the description. It does not disclose search behavior (exact match, partial, fuzzy), pagination defaults, sorting behavior, or what fields are searched. It only states 'by name', which is minimal.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes a concrete example. Every word contributes meaning, with no wasted text.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks guidance on pagination, sorting, search scope (e.g., does it search across all roles?), and how to interpret results. Sibling tools exist but no differentiation is provided.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented with descriptions in the schema. The description adds 'by name' but does not augment parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool searches people (voice actors, staff) by name with explicit examples (e.g. 井上, 水瀬いのり). The verb 'search' and resource 'people' are specific and differentiate from sibling tools like search_anime or get_people_by_ids.

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 usage for finding people by name but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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