inspect_entity

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses that observations are resolved via ObservationManager and that errors occur when entity not found. It lists all returned data, but does not mention performance or rate limits, though these are less critical for a read tool.

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 a single dense sentence that front-loads the purpose. It lists details efficiently, though it could be slightly more structured. No wasted words.

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?

Without an output schema, the description enumerates all key return fields (observations, relations, tags, etc.) and the error condition. It is sufficiently complete for a snapshot tool, though format is unspecified.

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% with one parameter 'name' clearly described. The description adds no new parameter-specific details beyond confirming it's for one entity, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 provides a 'Verbose snapshot of one entity' and enumerates all included data (observations, relations, tags, importance, timestamps, parentId, children, ancestors). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_ancestors or get_children by offering a comprehensive overview.

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 implies use when a complete entity overview is needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives. The listed contents guide the agent, but explicit usage context would improve.

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