Listar entidades

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Lista' makes the read-only intent reasonably clear, but the description does not disclose behavior such as whether the result includes disabled entities, ordering, pagination, or any scope beyond 'na cidade'. It is adequate but not richly transparent.

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 short sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It is front-loaded and immediately communicates the action and target resource.

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 low-complexity listing tool, the description is largely complete: it identifies what is listed and the scope. No output schema exists, but the verb 'Lista' sufficiently implies a list return. The only minor gap is the lack of elaboration on the enabledOnly parameter's effect.

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 schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'enabledOnly', including a default value, but the description does not add any explanation of what the parameter controls. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter, though the description could have clarified the enabled-only filtering behavior.

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 ('Lista') and resource ('entidades registradas na cidade'), clearly identifying the tool's function as listing registered entities. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_entity (single entity), register_entity, update_entity, and remove_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 description clearly implies the tool is for retrieving a collection of entities within a city, which is a distinct use case from the sibling tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it for listing scenarios.

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