dynatrace_managed_get_entity_details

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only safety profile, and the description does not contradict it. However, the description only adds the vague phrase 'detailed information' and does not disclose return shape, error behavior, or environment-specific behavior beyond the annotation.

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 short sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though somewhat generic and lacking useful detail.

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 2-parameter read-only getter, the basic usage is clear and the schema fully documents parameters. However, with no output schema, 'detailed information' is vague and does not clarify what details are returned or how they differ from related entity tools.

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 100%, with both entityId and environment_alias already explained in the schema. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'entity', and signals single-entity scope via 'a specific entity'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_entity_type_details or get_entity_relationships, leaving the agent to infer which 'details' tool is intended.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as discover_entities, get_entity_relationships, or get_entity_type_details. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit condition-based recommendations.

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