Get one SAP Cloud ALM entity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the operation as a fetch (read-only) and mentions a special case for feature display ids. No destructive or side effects are implied, and the behavior is straightforward. The description is transparent about what the tool does.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose and a key detail (display id), the second gives the usage pattern. Front-loaded with essential information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality and usage. It explains how to identify the entity (id with display id option) and which resource to use. It does not describe the output format, but for a simple fetch tool, the return (the entity object) is implicit. The description is adequately complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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% (all parameters have descriptions). The description adds value beyond the schema by illustrating the usage pattern ('Choose a resource and pass its id') and providing an example of a feature display id. It also reinforces the resource enum hint by referencing calm_resources. This helps an agent understand how to compose the call correctly.

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 fetches a single entity by id, specifies the verb 'Fetch', and gives an example for features. It distinguishes from siblings like calm_list (which lists multiple) and calm_resources (which provides resource list). The title and description align well.

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 provides clear usage guidance: 'Choose a resource and pass its id' and references calm_resources for valid resources. It also notes that features can be fetched by display id. While it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternatives, the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool versus siblings.

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