vmware-vdi

list_entitlements

Read-onlyIdempotent

List Active Directory users and groups entitled to a VMware Horizon desktop pool, showing who can access it. Supports pagination and requires a valid pool ID.

Instructions

[READ] List the AD users/groups entitled to a desktop pool (who can access it). Paginated.

A wrong pool id returns a teaching 404. Use list_desktop_pools for pool ids.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pool_id": "<pool_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_entitlements"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Page size (default 50).
`offset`	No	Page offset.
`target`	No	Horizon target from config.yaml; omit to use the default.
`pool_id`	Yes	The desktop-pool id (from list_desktop_pools).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.4.1Oct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that results are paginated and that an invalid pool id produces a teaching 404. That is genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about result volume or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences with the [READ] tag and the core purpose front-loaded, then pagination and error/routing notes. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 4-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential call mechanics: what it returns (AD users/groups with access), pagination, and how to source the required pool id. It does not describe the shape of returned entitlement entries, but that is a minor omission given the absence of an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so limit, offset, target and pool_id are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds only that pool_id comes from list_desktop_pools, which is useful but marginal; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (AD users/groups entitled to a desktop pool), with the clarifying gloss 'who can access it'. This cleanly separates it from siblings add_entitlement/remove_entitlement and from pool-listing tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the agent to list_desktop_pools for obtaining pool ids, and warns that a wrong pool id yields a teaching 404, which is actionable guidance. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' or a note on when add/remove_entitlement would be the right call instead, so it stops short of a 5.

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