get_template_entity

Does 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 implies a read operation but does not state side-effect profile, error behavior for a missing entity, permission needs, or returned config shape.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to stating the operation and its lookup key.

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?

Low-complexity get tool, but with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description leaves error handling, output format, and input constraints unspecified. Minimum viable but thin.

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 0% for 2 required parameters. The description only indicates they form a composite key ('by type + name'); it does not specify valid template_type values, name format, or examples, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 ('Return'), resource ('config of a single template entity'), and identifier ('by type + name'). It distinguishes from list_template_entities via 'single' but does not explicitly route to or away from any sibling.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like list_template_entities or upsert_template_entity, and no prerequisites. An agent gets no help choosing this over siblings.

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