get_library_people_by_person_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds the accepted identifier forms (PMS tag id or tagKey) and the GET endpoint, but does not disclose error behavior or what 'details' includes.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-line purpose, the endpoint, and a focused Args block. No sentence is wasted.

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 one-parameter GET operation with rich annotations and an output schema, it covers the main invocation ambiguity (what person_id can be). It is not more complete only because it omits explicit routing to the sibling media endpoint, but that gap is already reflected in usage guidance.

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 0%, making the description the only source of parameter meaning. It fully compensates by explaining that person_id accepts either the PMS tag id or the actor tagKey, and it defines tagKey as the hex portion of the Plex guid.

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 opens with 'Get person details', a clear verb+resource statement, and reinforces it with the endpoint path. It is distinguishable from the sibling get_library_people_by_person_id_media by the word 'details', though it never names or contrasts that sibling.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to alternatives such as get_library_people_by_person_id_media. An agent must infer the scope from the tool name and 'person details'.

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