get_entity_services

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the basic purpose. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, rate limits, or any side effects. For a tool lacking annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context.

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 with no unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness. Overall, it is well-structured for its length.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters (one required, one optional with enum), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value, how the optional parameter modifies results, or any constraints (e.g., valid entity_id ranges). A complete description would address these gaps.

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 50% (entity_id has a minimal description; service_type has an enum but no description). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema. It fails to clarify how entity_id or service_type affect the results.

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 'Get payment service authorizations for an entity,' which indicates a read operation on a specific resource. Although the tool name uses 'services' and the input schema includes multiple service types, the description only mentions 'payment,' which is slightly narrow. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_entity_agents or search_entities.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings. The sibling list is provided but no comparisons or conditions. The description does not mention prerequisites or context, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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