List entity states

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only/idempotent profile. The description adds a genuinely useful warning that an unfiltered call returns a huge payload, which is not derivable from annotations, but it says nothing about pagination behavior or result limits beyond that.

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?

Front-loads what is returned, then the args, then the practical caveat. Compact and no filler, though the arg list duplicates the schema.

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, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and the annotations cover the safety profile. An agent has enough to call it correctly; only return-size/pagination limits are left unspecified.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, including defaults and bounds. The description adds only a domain example ("light"), which the schema also provides, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (entity states), and enumerates the returned fields (entity_id, state, attributes). The word "All" implicitly contrasts with the singular ha_get_state sibling, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

"Always pass a domain on a real install — the full list is huge" gives concrete operational guidance on how to call it, and the offset param hints at paging. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g. ha_get_state for a single entity).

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