get_entity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with a read operation. The description adds that it returns associated triples, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose details like depth of triples, pagination, or any limitations beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise (three lines) with clear sections: purpose, args, returns. No redundant information, and the structure is easy to parse.

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 tool's low complexity (single parameter, read-only, output schema present), the description provides sufficient information: it explains what the tool does, its input, and its output format. No additional context is necessary.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds basic meaning by stating 'entity_id: ID of the entity.' This clarifies the parameter's purpose, though it remains minimal. Baseline is 3 because schema coverage is low but the description compensates to some extent.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('a knowledge graph entity and its associated triples'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_entities (which lists entities) and query_triples (which queries triples without an entity context).

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 the tool is for retrieving a single entity with its triples, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like list_entities or query_triples. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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