list_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It explains default lean formatting, the note that search_query does not support wildcards, and the behavior of detailed=True. This adequately discloses behavior without contradictions.

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 well-structured with sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Best Practices) and is front-loaded with the purpose. While somewhat verbose in docstring style, every sentence adds value and the organization aids readability.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, but an output schema, the description covers filtering, limits, detailed vs lean, and best practices. The return type is described, and the output schema provides additional structure, making it sufficiently complete for a list tool.

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 coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter (domain, search_query, limit, fields, detailed) including the search_query limitation and default values. Examples clarify usage, adding significant value beyond the schema.

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 the tool retrieves a list of entities with optional filtering. It differentiates from siblings implicitly via best practices (e.g., for domain overviews use domain_summary_tool) but does not explicitly contrast with search_entities_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 Best Practices section provides clear guidance on when to use lean format, prefer domain filtering, and when to use domain_summary_tool instead. Examples illustrate common use cases. It does not fully contrast with all siblings, but context is sufficient.

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