eth_search_persons

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint(true), idempotentHint(true), destructiveHint(false). The description adds a specific bug note about the Persons API returning HTTP 404, which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations. No other traits (auth, rate limits) are mentioned, but annotations cover safety adequately.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. The bug warning is important but could be more structured or separated. However, it remains concise with no unnecessary 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?

The tool has good annotations and a known output schema, but the description lacks information about return values, pagination, or error handling beyond the bug note. For a search tool, it should mention what properties are returned or how to interpret results. The bug notice is important but incomplete overall.

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 input schema provides descriptions for both parameters (e.g., 'Anzahl Ergebnisse (1–50)' for limit, and 'Name oder Stichwort zur Personensuche' with examples for query). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Sucht Personen in der ETH-Bibliothek Persons API', which clearly indicates the tool searches for persons. The annotations title further clarifies. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like eth_search_resources or eth_search_archive, leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific person 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only includes a bug warning about a possible HTTP 404, which is operational but not about usage context. No explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' statements are present.

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