Get Foundry Entity

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

With annotations already indicating readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, the description adds useful context by stating the return value includes the full document with system data and embedded items. It also clarifies the selected token/actor behavior, increasing transparency beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose followed by return details. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only retrieval tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it returns (full document, system data, embedded items) and its two modes (UUID or selected). It does not over-explain, but given the simplicity and annotations, it is complete enough for an agent to use effectively.

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 already has 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning—it mentions 'by UUID or selected' which aligns with the uuid and selected params, but does not further elaborate on parameter behavior or format. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 tool retrieves a Foundry entity by UUID or the currently selected token/actor. This uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('Foundry entity'), and the two modes distinguish it from sibling tools like delete, create, and update.

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?

The description conveys clear usage context: use it to get an entity by UUID or selected token/actor. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tool names (e.g., foundry_search, foundry_update) imply when this read-only retrieval tool is appropriate. No exclusions are stated.

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