get_participant

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a read-only operation ('View'), shows specific data fields (name, description, role, join date), and explicitly states 'No authentication required,' which is valuable context not covered elsewhere.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, consisting of a single, efficient sentence that conveys the purpose, data shown, and authentication requirement without any wasted words or redundancy.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It covers what the tool does, what data it returns, and authentication needs. However, it lacks details on potential errors or the exact format of the return values, which could be helpful for an agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'participant_id' fully documented. The description does not add any additional meaning or details about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 purpose with a specific verb ('View') and resource ('participant's public profile on the402.ai'), and it distinguishes from siblings by specifying it shows profile information rather than performing actions like 'create_plan' or 'update_service'.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (to view a participant's public profile) and mentions 'No authentication required,' which helps in usage decisions. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, such as 'get_service' or 'get_thread'.

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