list_vault_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behaviors. It only states what the tool does—list entities—but omits whether it is read-only, permissions required, data freshness, or any side effects. The limit parameter hints at pagination but it is not explained.

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 concise sentence, efficient and front-loaded. It could be slightly improved by mentioning the entity source or filtering capabilities, but it is not overly 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?

Given 5 parameters, no annotations, and a large sibling set, the description is incomplete. It lacks usage context, behavioral details, and does not help an agent decide when to call this tool over more specific counterparts. The presence of an output schema slightly reduces the need to explain return values, but overall completeness is low.

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?

Input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds minimal extra meaning, only noting entities are derived from notes, wikilinks, and tags. The schema already explains filters and defaults, so the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 lists 'modeled entities derived from notes, wikilinks, and tags,' distinguishing it from siblings like list_vault_notes or list_vault_entity_types. It identifies the resource and verb well, though 'modeled entities' is somewhat vague compared to more specific siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. With 18 sibling tools, agents receive no help choosing between list_vault_entities and specific context tools like get_vault_entity_context or list_vault_entity_events.

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