How do I know whether to use "de" or "à" for the transitive verb "attendre"?

Question

On the WordReference page for "attendre", one of the entries is as follows:

attendre vtr (compter sur une action)
expect⇒ vi

Et maintenant qu'attendez-vous de lui ?
And now what do you expect of him?

The "vtr" tells me that this entry is for a transitive version of the verb "attendre". This means that it takes an object.

But, from looking at that first line of the entry, I don't know if it can take a direct object, or an indirect object, or both. And, if it can take an indirect object, I don't know if the indirect object will be introduced by an "à" or a "de".

The example sentence shows that "de lui" is an indirect object, but I expect example sentences to be extra confirmation of information already communicated in the dictionary entry. Also, the example sentence doesn't tell me if the object is always an indirect object using "de", or if instead a direct object, or an indirect object with "à", could be used.

Questions:
1) By looking at this dictionary entry, how do I know if "attendre" in this entry takes a direct or indirect object (or both), and supposing that it can take an indirect object, if the indirect object will use "à" or "de" (or possibly both) ?

2) Some of WordReference's other entries for "attendre" are also transitive, but they explicitly say if the objects are direct or indirect, and if indirect, which of à or de introduces the indirect object. For example:

• attendre [qqn/qch] (vtr) tells me that attendre for that entry takes a direct object
• s'attendre à [qch] (pron + prép) tells me that attendre for that entry takes an indirect object introduced with à

Why does WordReference's entry for attendre vtr (compter sur une action) not give more information, unlike other entries it gives for attendre? Notably, the TLFi in LPH's answer below has an entry for WR's attendre (competer sur une action), but it explains all the objects -- why did WordReference not do the same?

That is, perhaps it is an omission in the WR dictionary? Or perhaps WR considered this usage too obvious to be listed? Or perhaps WR considered this usage to be too rare and thus not important? Or perhaps it would be impossible to list all or most entries for attendre that people use, and so dictionaries have to make a decision on what to list and what not to list, and sometimes they make entries like attendre vtr (compter sur une action) that intentionally leaves out information, to indicate meaning, but intentionally leaves out the many forms (eg, what indirect objects it takes, etc) that that verb can be used with that meaning? Or perhaps some other reason?

Answer 1

You do have both a direct object and an indirect object in this sentence.

• Et maintenant qu' (direct) attendez-vous de lui (indirect) ?

The only sense for "attendre qqc de qqn ou qqc" is IB1.c) in the TLFi. There is no other preposition used with the "coi" than "de" in this sense. The preposition "à" would introduce an adverbial and the sens would be changed (Il l'attends à la sortie. — Ils nous attendent au tournant. (very colloquial), …)

c) Attendre qqc. (de bon) de qqn ou de qqc. Espérer un heureux résultat de l'action ou des capacités de quelqu'un, d'une action sur quelque chose.

• Attendre beaucoup de qqn
• n'attendre son salut que de soi-même
• attendre qqc. de l'étude d'un document
• ce qu'on attend d'une invention

You can see now that you might get this sort of information from a more comprehensive dictionary, such as for instance the TLFi. In the TLFi, when the object and indirect object are optional the words "qqc" and "qqn" used to represent them will be between parentheses; here there are none, which means than you can't dispense with either a "cod " or a "coi ".

• Ils attendaient d'eux. Ils attentaient d'eux quelque chose que l'accusateur ne comprends pas.
• Si vous attendez trop de lui vous serez déçue.

I believe, however, that the "coi " can be omitted at least when the sentence is negative (in some cases);

• N'attendez pas trop. — (better) N'en attendez pas trop. ("en" shouldn't't be representing a person, although in the spoken language this ule is often disregarded.) — N'attendez pas trop [de lui/de sa part]. (user LPH)

• Je vous avais prévenue Sarah. N'attendez pas trop de gratitude. (google)

• Sinon, faites comme moi : lisez, rêvez, jouissez de la vie, elle en vaut la peine ; et n'attendez pas trop. » (google)

By looking at the entry, grammar tells without ambiguity—rare circumstance—that "que" must be a direct object as this word can't be a conjunction ("que" being a conjunction entails the presence of two verbs.); "que" can only be the object interrogative pronoun, then. Of course, this is a particular case; for the general case ("Il attend des informations supplémentaires de l'organisation.") it is difficult to tell if you haven't developped some familiarity with the concept; particularly in this case, as you can invert the order of the objects ("Il attend de l'organisation des informations supplémentaires."); you might even not be able to tell which is which without relying on a context.

Whether a complete information on the prepositions is available or whether you can do away with an object depends on the dictionary and sometimes even the best dictionaries do not tell you that. As concerns the prepositions, some dictionaries do give all the possibilities but others don't.