list_entities

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful scope about which entity types are included and what filter dimensions exist, but it does not disclose output shape, ordering, pagination, or any other runtime behavior.

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 short sentences with no filler. The entity scope is front-loaded and the filter capabilities are stated compactly. Every phrase contributes to understanding the tool.

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 read-only listing tool, the description plus schema give an agent enough to understand the purpose, required projectId, and primary filter options. Some details like pagination or return value shape are absent, but they are not critical enough to make the tool hard to invoke correctly.

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 67%, and the description adds some meaning by mapping 'scene' to appearsInNode and introducing 'tag' and 'kind' as filters. However, it does not clarify the undocumented tag parameter or add much beyond what the schema already provides for role, search, and appearsInNode.

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 names the resource ('the project's story world') and the entity categories it covers, and explains that results can be filtered by kind, tag, or scene. It is clear, but it does not use an explicit verb like 'list' and does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling get_entity tool.

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 when to use the tool: when you need story-world entities filtered by kind, tag, or scene. However, it does not state when to prefer this over get_entity or any other sibling, and it offers no exclusions or alternative routing.

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