grocy_objects_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The endpoint path adds the useful signal that this is a thin passthrough to the Grocy REST API returning a raw entity record. It says nothing about error behavior for a non-existent id or per-entity permission requirements, which matters for openWorld access.

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?

Two short fragments, front-loaded with the action and followed by the route; nothing is wasted. It is arguably too terse for its remaining gaps, but as prose it is well-structured and efficient.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate that a single raw entity record is returned and what happens on a miss; neither is stated. For a generic tool spanning 36 entity types that overlaps with many dedicated getters, this leaves the agent without the context needed to choose it confidently.

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%, with the 36-value entity enum and a positive-integer object_id fully documented, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only mirrors the path template ({entity}/{objectId}) and adds no syntax, format, or cross-entity nuance beyond it.

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 ('Get') and scope ('one Grocy object'), plus the underlying REST route, which makes the generic read-one semantics unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling grocy_objects_list or the entity-specific getters (grocy_chore_get, grocy_battery_get), so differentiation is only implied by the singular 'one'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this generic reader versus grocy_objects_list or the many dedicated getters like grocy_chore_get and grocy_battery_get that overlap with it. The agent must infer that this is the generic fallback for any entity in the enum.

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