get_stale_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It indicates a read operation returning filtered entities, which is straightforward. However, it does not disclose potential costs, limits, or whether the tool modifies state. Given no side effects implied, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is one sentence with no redundancy. Every word is necessary. It is extremely concise and front-loaded with the core action.

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?

The description explains what the tool returns and the condition. Given the tool has a simple input and no output schema, it is largely complete. However, it omits details like pagination, ordering, or a limit on returned entities, which could be helpful.

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?

The single parameter 'threshold' is fully described in the schema (type, range, default). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is correct.

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 returns entities with a freshness score below a specified threshold. The verb 'Return' and resource 'entities' are explicit. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_expired_entities' or 'freshness_report'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to prefer 'get_expired_entities' or 'check_freshness'. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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