list_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states it returns a list of entities but does not disclose output format, pagination, limits, or side effects. For a simple listing tool, the lack of detail is acceptable but not thorough. It correctly implies a read-only operation.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose (list of entities) and following with a usage tip. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool's role as a discovery/metadata listing tool and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what it does and when to use it. It could mention that it returns entity names/metadata, but the context of sibling tools (e.g., get_catalogs) implies that list_entities returns identifiers, not data.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions on both parameters. The tool description adds a list of entity types matching the 'type' parameter but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a list of all available entity types (catalogs, documents, registers) in a 1C database, using specific prefixes. The name 'list_entities' aligns with this purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_catalogs' or 'get_documents' which retrieve actual data.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool first when working with an unknown 1C database, providing clear context for when to invoke it. Since siblings are more specific, this usage guidance helps the agent avoid unnecessary exploration.

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