get_entity_registry

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries the full burden. Description discloses the return fields but does not mention side effects, read-only nature, permissions, or error behavior (e.g., what if entity_id not found). The name 'get' implies idempotence, but no explicit behavioral traits beyond that. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Description is two sentences plus one line of code example. No wasted words, every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with the main action and fields.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is sufficient: explains what it returns and gives an example. However, it could mention the return format or that it retrieves the registry entry vs state. Lacks explicit mention of output structure, but schema coverage is 0% so some extra detail would help.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning to the entity_id parameter by providing an example ('e.g. 'light.living_room') and stating the purpose 'Entity ID to look up'. However, it does not specify format constraints or where to find entity IDs. Adds value above the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get the full entity registry entry' and lists the fields (platform, config, device, disabled/hidden, area). It is specific about the resource (entity registry entry) and the action (get), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_entity_registry (which lists multiple) and get_entity (which likely gets state).

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?

Description provides an example usage and context for when to use (to look up a single entity's registry details). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the context of sibling tools implies appropriate usage. Lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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