noark5_get_entity

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the operation retrieves an entity and returns it 'formatted' with 'full details' and 'all fields and links,' which is useful. However, it does not state side effects, error behavior, authentication needs, or whether the entity URL must be previously obtained from a listing.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main purpose, and organized into Args/Returns. Every sentence contributes useful information with no redundant filler.

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 single-parameter fetch tool, the description covers how to invoke it and what to expect in return. It could mention prerequisites such as credentials or relationship to sibling retrieval tools, but the presence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation make this largely sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameter, and it does: it specifies that entity_url is the 'self-href URL' of the entity to fetch, adding meaningful semantic detail beyond the schema's bare string. This is enough for an agent to supply the correct value.

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 a specific action ('Get full details') on a specific resource ('entity') and clarifies that the entity is identified by URL. It is clear, though it does not contrast with sibling read tools such as noark5_get_root_links or noark5_entity_links.

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 used when you already have an entity's self-href URL, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings, no conditions, and no mention of prerequisite steps like setting credentials. It provides no exclusions or alternatives.

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