nifi_get_provenance_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety/behavior profile is covered. The description adds almost nothing beyond that – no mention of behavior on missing events, size of before/after sets, or access requirements.

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?

Two tight lines: the primary purpose is front-loaded and the endpoint reference is a short follow-up. Zero filler.

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?

A simple read-only fetch with an output schema, so no return-value explanation is needed. Annotations cover safety. The main gap is the missing link to the query tool that produces event IDs, which is important for correct usage.

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% with 1 required param ('event_id'), so the description must compensate. It does so by implying the identifier comes from the provenance endpoint and that the event contains before/after attribute sets, but doesn't give format or source details. Baseline 3 is borderline; the description adds slight value but leaves format ambiguity.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('One provenance event') and clarifies the scope ('full before/after attribute set'), plus the backing endpoint. It distinguishes itself implicitly from nifi_provenance_query by being a single-event fetch, but does not explicitly name the 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 guidance on when to use this versus nifi_provenance_query or nifi_get_lineage, nor any prerequisites. The endpoint is stated but that's not usage guidance.

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