registry_get_agent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' clearly signals a non-destructive read returning one entry, but the description does not address edge behavior such as what happens when the agent_id does not exist or whether the full entry is returned.

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?

A single six-word sentence with no filler; the verb and object are front-loaded and every word 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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, output schema present), so the description is nearly sufficient for correct invocation. It lacks any mention of when to prefer this over registry_list_agents and any error/edge-case behavior, which is a clear gap for an operation with zero annotations.

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% and the description does not compensate: it never explains agent_id format, provenance, or how it is used. The only implicit meaning is that agent_id identifies the registry entry, which is already evident from the parameter name.

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 ('a single agent registry entry'), clearly identifying the operation. The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling registry_list_agents, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance. The phrase 'a single... entry' implies it is for fetching one specific registry entry by ID rather than listing all, but no condition or alternative tool is stated.

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