list_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The description only mentions listing with filters; it does not state that the operation is read-only, nor does it disclose the env var fallback behavior for parameters (though this appears in the schema), pagination, or output shape. This is minimal beyond the name.

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 that front-loads the action and resource, and then mentions the optional filters. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters and no output schema, so the description is minimally viable. It does not mention important context like the env var defaults (though present in schema), pagination, or whether the entity list includes metadata. Given the lack of annotations, this could be more complete, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter documentation, including examples and env var fallback behavior. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema already handles semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('Dataverse tables (entities)'), and the optional filters ('prefix and solution'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_solutions (which lists solutions) and get_entity_schema (which retrieves schema for a specific 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?

Usage is implied: use this tool to list entities. However, no explicit guidance is given on when to prefer this over the many sibling tools that also deal with entities (e.g., get_entity_schema, create_entity). There is no exclusion or alternative named, so the guidance is only implicit.

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