entities_get_entity

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It states the tool retrieves data, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm idempotency, permissions, or rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks disclosure of side effects (though likely none).

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 sentence that is front-loaded and concise. However, it could be slightly more structured to include key information like the return format or parameter details. It earns its place but leaves some gaps.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no annotations), the description adequately covers the core purpose. However, it lacks contextual cues such as typical use cases, prerequisites (e.g., entity must exist), or how the returned data is structured (though an output schema exists). It is minimally sufficient.

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 one required parameter 'entity_id' with 0% description coverage. The description does not elaborate on the parameter beyond its name. Since the parameter is self-describing (standard entity ID) and the schema is simple, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'full state and attributes of a single entity'. It is specific enough to distinguish from many siblings like entities_list_entities (which lists all entities) and entities_get_entity_exposure (which gets exposure settings). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other single-entity retrieval tools like ws_get_states.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not compare with entities_list_entities for batch retrieval or ws_get_states for overall state. An agent would need to infer usage from the name alone.

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