get_entity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the key safety trait is covered. The description adds useful context about the contents of the returned entity details, but does not disclose behavior such as not-found handling, auth requirements, or whether relations are returned inline. With annotation coverage, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by a compact list of included content. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant or filler text.

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 one-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint=true and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns: values, relations, backlinks, and types. The required parameter is fully documented in the schema, so nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this correctly.

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%, and the only parameter 'id' is already described as 'Entity ID (dashless hex)'. The description repeats 'by ID' but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 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 clearly states the action ('Get full details') and resource ('single entity by ID'), and enumerates what is included: values, relations, backlinks, and types. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_entities and search_entities, which cover collections or searches rather than a single known entity.

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 phrase 'single entity by ID' gives clear context: use this when you already have an entity ID and need its full details rather than a search or list result. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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