treeflow_list_entities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only listing intent and describes the kind of content returned, but it does not mention response format, pagination, or whether hidden/system entities are included. This is adequate for a simple list operation but not deeply 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, dense sentence with no filler. Every element contributes: the action, the resource, the scope, and a clarifying parenthetical definition.

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?

This is a simple tool with one required parameter and no output schema. The description tells the agent what will be listed and for which bot, which is sufficient for invoking the tool correctly. It could mention response shape, but for this complexity level the gap is minor.

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 already documents tree_id as 'ID del bot/árbol' with 100% coverage. The description only reinforces the bot relationship and adds no extra details about format, examples, or constraints, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a precise action ('Lista') and resource ('entidades'), and clarifies what counts as an entity with the parenthetical '(valores, sinónimos, expresiones regulares)'. It also scopes the operation to a bot, which distinguishes it from sibling list tools for branches, intents, leafs, and other resources.

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 intended usage is implied by the resource name and the singular required parameter tree_id, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over sibling list tools or when not to use it. An agent can infer the context, but the description does not state exclusions or alternatives.

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