Fetch detailed data for a specific RPG Maker MZ entity by ID. Retrieve properties for actors, classes, skills, items, weapons, armors, enemies, or states.
Get detailed information about a specific entity by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Entity ID | |
| entityType | Yes | Entity type |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, what happens when the ID does not exist, whether any permissions are required, or what 'detailed information' comprises.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. It is tight, though arguably under-informative rather than optimally economical.
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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials are present. Still missing error/missing-entity behavior and any hint about the shape or scope of the returned detail.
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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (id, entityType) and the enum of entity types are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the ID lookup, adding no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides.
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?
States a specific verb (get) and resource (entity) plus the retrieval key (by ID), which distinguishes it from search_entities and list_entities. However, it never names those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation must be inferred.
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 phrase 'by ID' implicitly signals the precondition (use when you already have an ID), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no reference to search_entities or list_entities as alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.