Search people

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the raw endpoint string (GET /search/person), with no information on matching behavior, result limits, pagination, or auth requirements.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with no padding sentences. It loses a point only because the opening line duplicates the title verbatim before the slightly more informative second line.

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 two-parameter read-only search with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally viable. It omits any note on result shape, match type, or how it relates to the other people-lookup tools.

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%, with both 'name' and 'withHidden' documented inline, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by name' phrase maps to one parameter but adds no syntax, format, or matching semantics beyond the schema.

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 says 'Search people' / 'Search for people by name', which names a verb (search) and resource (people) plus a filter field. But the first line simply restates the title, and nothing distinguishes it from siblings like immich_get_all_people, immich_get_person, or immich_search_users.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives. An agent cannot tell from this text whether to use this versus immich_get_all_people for listing or immich_get_person for lookup by ID.

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