Get Career Entity

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by enumerating what is returned (dates, notes, points with id/text/state, documents, activity timeline) and by disclosing the filtering nuance 'archived included, deleted excluded' for used_in_bases.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose ('Full detail for one Career KB entity'), followed by the return contents. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return payload and its filtering rules, which is exactly what an agent needs for a read-only single-entity fetch. The only gap is the unstated provenance/format of entity_id.

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% and there is a single required entity_id, so the description must compensate. It implies the parameter selects 'one Career KB entity' but gives no format, source, or lookup guidance for the id. Baseline adequacy, no added semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Full detail for one Career KB entity') and the singular scoping implicitly separates it from list siblings like kb_list_entities. An agent can tell it is a detail-fetch for a single entity without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'for one Career KB entity' – it presupposes a known entity_id but never states where that id comes from (e.g., kb_list_entities) or when to prefer this over kb_list_points or kb_edit_entity. No explicit exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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