kb_get

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

The description indicates a read operation ('retrieve') and specifies what is included ('in full, including evidence'), but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as idempotency, auth requirements, or error conditions. With no annotations, more detail would improve transparency.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's core function. Every word adds value, no fluff.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It could mention prerequisites or error conditions, but the core purpose is clearly communicated.

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?

The parameter entry_id has 0% schema description coverage and the tool description does not explain its meaning or format. No additional semantics are provided beyond the schema's title 'Entry Id'.

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 retrieves one KB entry in full including evidence, distinguishing it from siblings like kb_search (search) and kb_list (list) which return summaries.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Usage is implied: use when you have an entry_id and need the full entry details. It lacks alternatives or exclusions.

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