lookup_person

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

With no annotations, the description only indicates 'look up', implying a read operation, but does not confirm safety, permissions, or any constraints. No information on side effects or limits. The agent has minimal insight into behavior beyond the basic action.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the key information. However, it is so brief that it might sacrifice completeness for conciseness.

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?

Given the absence of output schema and annotations, the description fails to explain what the 'professional profile' contains or how the tool behaves with multiple inputs. The tool ecosystem is large, and a more detailed description would improve completeness.

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%; both parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds the insight that either parameter can be used exclusively, but this is already inferable from the schema. The added value is marginal.

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's action (look up) and resource (person's professional profile). It identifies two input identifiers (LinkedIn URL or Pubrio ID). However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'lookup_person_linkedin' or 'enrich_person'.

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 provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or context about the two input options. With many sibling tools, this is a significant gap.

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