get_entity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds that 'No approval needed', which is a useful behavioral trait beyond the annotation. It reinforces read-only behavior and mentions the RPC, providing extra context without contradicting the annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the action, target, parameters, and safety profile in one line.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values are covered. The description covers the essential invocation details (unique key, type, read-only). It doesn't explain what an OliveTin entity is, but given the output schema and annotations, the information is sufficient for a basic understanding.

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 the description must compensate, but it only restates the parameter names ('by unique key and type') without explaining their meaning, constraints, or the empty default for type. Minimal value is added over 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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches a single OliveTin entity by unique key and type, using a specific verb (Fetch) and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling get_entities by explicitly saying 'single', and references the GetEntity RPC for precision.

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 implies usage for single-entity lookup and mentions that no approval is needed, giving clear context. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the 'get_entities' sibling or other alternatives, so it lacks an explicit exclusion, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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