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

Beyond the read-only annotations, it discloses important behavior: omitting `select` can return hundreds of columns, `expand` embeds at most 50 child rows, and parent records are not expanded. That is meaningful call-shaping context for an agent.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core operation and then efficiently packs parameter guidance into a few dense but useful clauses. There is no wasted text.

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 annotations covering safety and the schema covering parameter details, the description supplies the remaining behavioral context needed to call this tool correctly, including return shape hints and expansion limits.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description still adds cross-parameter meaning, especially the child-vs-parent `expand` distinction and the `Entity_RecordID` workaround for parents, though much of it overlaps with the schema.

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 and resource: get one record by RecordID from any table. It clearly distinguishes this from list/query siblings by emphasizing a single record keyed by RecordID.

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 gives clear operational context for using RecordID and explains when to use `select` and `expand`, including that only child tables are expandable. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as `method_query_records`, so it falls short of a 5.

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