passgage_get_entrance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the action (get) but does not mention behavior for non-existent IDs, response format, or whether any special access is needed. For a simple read operation, 'get' implies read-only, but the lack of any additional behavioral context is a gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that contains exactly the necessary information. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 simple single-parameter get tool without an output schema or annotations, the description is minimally complete. It articulates the core purpose, but given the lack of an output schema, it would be helpful to mention what is returned (e.g., the full entrance object) or error behavior. Still, the tool is simple enough that the description is not severely lacking.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameter with a description ('The UUID of the entrance to retrieve'). The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'specific entrance' and the access method 'by ID'. This clearly distinguishes it from list/create/update/delete sibling tools. It is immediately obvious what the tool does.

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 usage context is implied by the verb 'Get' and the parameter 'id' — an agent would understand to use this when it has a specific entrance ID. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over list_entrances or any mention of prerequisites like authentication. This falls at 'implied usage' rather than explicit guidance.

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