entities_list_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. However, it only mentions listing all entities with a filter, omitting details on response scope (e.g., disabled entities), pagination, or rate limits. The output schema exists but the description adds no transparency beyond the core function.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and includes an optional qualifier. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (listing all entities with optional filter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks behavioral details like whether the list includes disabled entities, sorting, or pagination. It meets the minimum viable standard but has gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by adding example domain values ('light, switch, sensor…') that clarify the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 it lists all entities with an optional filter by domain, using specific examples like 'light, switch, sensor…'. This distinguishes it from siblings that list specific entity types or registry entries.

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 usage for general entity listing with optional filtering, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like entities_list_entity_registry, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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