Person details

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: the results are capped at the 15 best-known credits, telling the agent to expect a truncated list rather than the full filmography.

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 compact sentence with no filler; the separate 'what it does' and 'what it returns' information is packed into one clause. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a one-parameter read tool.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return structure, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a simple ID-based lookup this is nearly complete; only routing guidance against siblings is absent.

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% and the single personId parameter is fully documented in the schema, including its constraint and provenance from search_people. The description adds no meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states exactly what the tool returns for a person resource: biography plus their 15 best-known movies/shows with each role. That clearly separates it from get_movie_details and get_tv_show_details, though it is phrased as content rather than an action verb ('retrieve').

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?

Usage is only implied by the name and the 'get details' pattern shared with siblings. There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus search_people or the movie/TV detail tools, and no mention that a personId from search_people must be obtained first.

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