list_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether results are paginated or capped, whether custom entities are included, or what 'basic information' contains. For a low-risk list call this is a modest but real gap.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and no wasted words. Slightly penalized because 'with their basic information' is vague padding that could have been replaced with concrete return details.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral truth, and it does not define what fields 'basic information' includes or how many entities come back. For a discovery tool an agent needs at least the shape of the response to use it confidently.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering input is accepted, though it could note that server-side filtering requires a different sibling tool.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Dynamics 365 entities') with a qualifier on scope ('all available'). It does not distinguish itself from siblings like query_entities, get_entity, or get_entity_schema, leaving the agent to infer the boundary between enumeration and retrieval.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With nine sibling tools including query_entities, get_entity, and get_entity_schema, the description gives no signal for choosing this discovery call over a filtered query or a single-entity fetch.

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