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

The description says 'Gets', matching the annotations of readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. It adds no behavioral information beyond the annotations, such as missing-record behavior or needed connection state, but nothing contradicts the annotations either.

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 purpose sentence with no filler, and the core operation is front-loaded.

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 simple single-record getter, the description is adequate: the required company context and connectionReference behaviors are described in the schema itself. There is no output schema, and the description could add expected return shape, but it is not necessary for such an obvious retrieval operation.

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%, and the schema documents id, companyName, and especially connectionRef in detail. The description adds only 'by id', which is redundant with the id property, so no extra semantic value is contributed.

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 a specific verb, resource, and lookup key: 'Gets one BRC sales entry by id.' This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling get_* tools for other transaction types and from list/batch tools.

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?

It is clear that this is for retrieving a single sales entry by id, which implies usage context, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose it over brc_batch_sales_entries or the other get_* siblings, nor any exclusions.

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