Get entity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions transparent ID resolution but does not disclose if this involves extra API calls, side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. It fails to fully inform the agent of the tool's behavior.

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 two sentences, each serving a purpose: the first states the action, the second explains the ID resolution. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover return format, error handling, or limits for a fetch tool. It lacks these details, making it incomplete for robust usage by an agent.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining the dual-ID system and the relationship between entity_type, id, and entity_id. However, it does not describe campaign_id, which is required, leaving a gap in parameter understanding.

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 'Fetch a single entity', giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like kanka_list_entities by focusing on fetching one entity. The mention of two ID systems adds specificity.

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 explains the two ways to specify the entity (type-scoped id vs global entity_id), giving usage context. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives like kanka_search or kanka_list_entities, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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