query_entities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the use of AutoCAD SelectionSet (fast), the AND logic, and the limitation of not entering XREF/blocks. This is meaningful behavior, though it doesn't mention side effects (appears read-only) or response structure.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core purpose and then add scope limitations and performance context. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool with 6 optional parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description gives essential scope and speed context but omits parameter semantics and any mention of output format/limits. It is adequate for basic understanding but leaves gaps for correct 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 has 0% parameter description coverage, so the description must compensate, but it only generically mentions filters (AND) without explaining the six parameters (type, block, layer, limit, detail, text_contains). No parameter-specific meaning is added.

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 returns modelspace entities matching filters (AND), using the verb 'query' implied and specific resource 'Entidades del modelspace'. It also distinguishes from sibling find_nested by explicitly excluding XREF/blocks.

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 explicitly says when NOT to use this tool (for XREF/blocks) and points to find_nested as the alternative. It also notes speed in large plans, implying suitability for filtering large drawings, but does not contrast with other siblings like entities_near or list_layers.

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