List entity registry entries

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context: the underlying WS endpoint, that filtering happens client-side, and that disabled/hidden entities are included — useful details an agent would otherwise not know.

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?

Front-loaded with the key distinction (no state values), then structured 'Use when / Not for / Returns' blocks. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with a full output schema, the description covers scope, filtering mechanics, distinguishing metadata fields, and routing to alternatives. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single `domain` parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds only that filtering is client-side, a minor semantic on top of the schema's own example-based description, so the baseline 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?

It states a specific verb (list) and resource (raw entity registry) and explicitly contrasts with the sibling `entities_list_entities`, noting this variant carries only registry metadata and no state values. An agent can pick it apart from siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' (auditing registry metadata, disabled/hidden entities with no live state) and 'Not for' (current state values → use `entities_list_entities`) sections name the exact condition and the alternative tool.

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