list_entities

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the transparency burden. It only states that entities are listed and an optional domain filter exists; it does not disclose pagination, result limits, ordering, permissions, read-only status, or response format.

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 one short sentence with no wasted words and the main action is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it could include slightly more operational context without becoming verbose.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It leaves the agent without knowledge of return structure, any constraints on the domain parameter, or how many entities might be returned, which is needed for confident invocation.

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 100% for the single 'domain' parameter, and the description adds no information beyond what the schema already says. It does not explain allowed domain values, matching behavior, or how filtering interacts with the result set, so value over schema is minimal.

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 states a specific verb ('list') and resource ('entity') with an optional domain filter, making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like list_concepts or list_agents, but the resource type makes the distinction implicit.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool over read_entity (for a single entity) or other list_* tools for different resource types. There are no alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites mentioned.

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