get_entity_record

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the return content ('full record with all properties and child entities'), which helps set expectations. However, it doesn't mention error behavior or access requirements, but for a read operation this level is sufficient.

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?

Concise two-sentence paragraph, with the core action front-loaded and a relevant example. The alternative tool mention is integrated without clutter. Every sentence contributes value.

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 simple retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers the full return shape ('all properties and child entities') and use-case context. Sibling tools like fetch_query are referenced appropriately. No critical gaps remain.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example ('entity 'user' with key 1') and clarifies the key is a primary key, going slightly beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 single entity record using entity name and key, with explicit scope ('exactly which record you need'). It distinguishes itself by naming the alternative fetch_query for discovery, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides direct usage criteria: 'Use this when you know exactly which record you need' and explicitly points to fetch_query as the alternative for discovery. This gives the agent clear decision rules.

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