run_tracxn_people

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add useful context by enumerating what is returned (roles, founded companies, board memberships, angel investments, portfolio exits, top news) and by disclosing a flat cost of 5 points per successful run. It says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or failure behavior.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by the returned data and cost. Every clause earns its place and there is no filler.

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 no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the data categories returned, and it discloses the cost per run. It remains silent on error/failure behavior and on whether an id token must come from a prior Tracxn call, but for a single-param lookup tool it is largely complete.

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 the single 'person' parameter already documents the URL-or-id-token format with an example. The description repeats the same URL/id token distinction without adding format or validation detail, so baseline 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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Get one founder / angel investor / board member from Tracxn') plus the lookup key ('profile URL or id token'), which distinguishes it from the many sibling search tools like run_tracxn_companies_search. It stops short of naming which sibling to use for multi-person discovery, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 implied rather than stated: 'one ... by profile URL or id token' signals a single-entity lookup, not a search, and 'per successful run' implies one profile per call. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative (e.g., a Tracxn people search) to route the agent.

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