Find Entity By Path

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real behavior: internal routes are read directly, aliases are looked up in the path alias table, query strings and fragments are ignored, and the negative case returns found: false. It does not mention permission/auth requirements or failure behavior beyond the not-found case.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then three tight sentences covering resolution mechanics and edge cases. No filler; every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description covers resolution logic, URL handling, and the not-found case. It is nearly complete for a one-parameter lookup, with only auth/permission context absent.

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 0% (the single 'path' param has no schema description), so the description must compensate, and it does: it gives example values, states a full URL is accepted, and specifies that query string and fragment are ignored. That is meaningful format guidance beyond the bare 'string' type.

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 (resolve) and resource (URL path or alias) mapped to an entity, with concrete examples ("/about", "/node/123"). An agent can distinguish it from get_node (which takes an id) and search_entities without opening either 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?

The examples and 'resolve a URL path or alias to its entity' imply the use case (you have a path, not an id), but the description never names an alternative such as get_node or search_entities, nor states when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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