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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It clearly implies a read operation via 'List,' but it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, nor does it describe return format, error handling, or preconditions such as entity existence. The action is clear enough for a simple list tool, but richer 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 of six words: 'List addons enabled on an entity.' It is front-loaded with the verb and omits any redundant information, making it highly 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?

For a simple 1-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what it lists and the target entity. However, it does not explicitly mention what the return value looks like (e.g., an array of addon IDs), nor how errors like invalid entity IDs are surfaced, which would make it fully self-contained.

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 input schema covers the only parameter 'id' with the description 'Entity ID' (100% schema description coverage). The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond mentioning 'an entity,' so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'List addons enabled on an entity' uses a specific verb (List) and clearly identifies the resource (addons) and scope (an entity). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like subfeed_enable_addon and subfeed_list_models by focusing solely on listing enabled addons.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description: use when you need to see which addons are enabled on an entity. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this over alternatives, nor any mention of related tools like subfeed_enable_addon or subfeed_disable_addon.

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