immich_get_person_statisticsRetrieve statistics for a specific person in Immich by their ID, showing asset counts and related metrics for that person.
Get person statistics
Retrieve statistics about a specific person.
Immich operation: GET /people/{id}/statistics · tag: People
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | format: uuid |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the underlying Immich operation and tag, which is mild context, but it does not disclose return format, authentication needs, or rate limits.
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 short and front-loaded. The first line redundantly restates the title, but the following sentence and operation metadata are efficient and add useful endpoint information.
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 simple single-parameter read-only statistics endpoint, the description provides the resource and operation. It does not describe the return values, but the annotations and schema already carry the safety and parameter details, so it is largely complete for tool selection.
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% for the single id parameter, which is documented as UUID format. The description only implies that the ID refers to a person, so it adds no meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides.
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 clear verb and resource: retrieve statistics about a specific person. It is more specific than the title alone, but it does not differentiate this tool from other statistics endpoints such as album_statistics, asset_statistics, or library_statistics.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools like immich_get_person, immich_get_person_thumbnail, or other statistics tools, so the agent must infer usage 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.