get_person

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully signals that the data is public (implying no auth required) and mutation-free, but says nothing about behavior on an unknown/invalid address, rate limits, or freshness of the track record.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the clarifying payload in parentheses; nothing is wasted and no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 low-complexity single-parameter read with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable sketch of the returned content (quest/gig history, USDG earned). It stops short of describing the return shape or error cases, which would fully close the gap.

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?

Only one parameter and 0% schema description coverage, so the description should compensate. 'Any wallet' usefully clarifies the address is a wallet address rather than a user ID, but gives no format, chain, or validation details.

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?

States a specific resource (a wallet's public profile and track record) and enumerates the payload (quests and gigs done, USDG earned), which is more than a restatement of the name. The phrase 'any wallet' implicitly separates it from the sibling get_my_account, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, even though siblings like get_my_account and get_platform_info compete for the same lookup intent. Usage context is only inferable from the described content.

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