exact_list_entities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond these by disclosing that results are 'live' and constrained by the 'effective read policy', which informs the agent that the returned set may vary based on current permissions.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every element—'List', 'live metadata entities', and 'allowed by the effective read policy'—earns its place and collectively conveys the tool's core behavior.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and policy filtering. However, it omits any guidance on the 'search' parameter and says nothing about the shape or paging of the returned entity list, which an agent may need for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to explain the optional 'search' parameter but does not mention it at all. The parameter name is self-explanatory to some degree, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to guess how search interacts with the list.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('live metadata entities'), and adds a meaningful scope qualifier ('allowed by the effective read policy'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like exact_get_entity (single entity retrieval), exact_get_entity_schema (schema retrieval), and exact_list_entity_records (records within an entity).

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 implies the tool is used for enumerating metadata entities, and the 'allowed by the effective read policy' qualifier hints at its filtering behavior. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over siblings such as exact_list_actions or exact_list_entity_records, nor does it state any exclusions.

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