Get Entity Metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies read-only, there's no mention of caching behavior, performance characteristics (metadata calls can be expensive), required privileges (system admin vs user), or what specific metadata properties are returned in the output schema.

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 extremely brief (6 words), which avoids verbosity, but borders on tautology with the title 'Get Entity Metadata'. While front-loaded, it lacks the substance to be genuinely helpful. A second sentence distinguishing this from sibling tools would improve value without sacrificing clarity.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated) and 100% input schema coverage, the minimal description is technically sufficient for basic invocation. However, given the dense sibling landscape of 30+ similar tools, the description fails to provide necessary context for correct tool selection.

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%—both 'entityName' and 'environment' are fully described in the schema with types and descriptions. The description adds no additional semantics about valid entity name formats, case sensitivity, or environment resolution logic beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score 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 states the basic action ('Get metadata') and resource ('PowerPlatform entity'), but fails to distinguish from siblings like 'get-entity-attributes' or 'get-entity-relationships'. In the PowerPlatform/Dataverse context, 'metadata' has a specific technical meaning (entity schema definition) that isn't clarified here, leaving ambiguity about whether this returns schema details, attribute lists, or relationship maps.

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 provided on when to use this versus 'get-entity-attributes' (which gets field definitions) or 'get-record' (which gets data). No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., whether the entity must exist, or if this works for both custom and system entities).

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