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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that this is a paginated list call returning { list, next_cursor }. This goes beyond the annotation by clarifying the response shape and pagination behavior without contradicting it.

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?

Two tight sentences deliver the core action, scope, API endpoint, and return shape with no filler. The most important information is 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?

For a list operation with a rich schema and readonly annotation, the description is nearly sufficient. It states the resource, pagination, and return format, though it does not explicitly guide the agent between this and related list/get tools.

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 100%, so all seven parameters are described in the input schema. The description only refers generically to 'optional filters', adding no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('a customer's entities'), and even identifies the exact API endpoint. This clearly separates it from sibling list tools such as list_customers and get_entity.

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 first sentence establishes the intended use case: listing entities belonging to a customer, with pagination and filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5, but the context is clear enough for selection among siblings.

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