list_adr_sections

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it lists top-level (##) section names in document order, which is useful. However, it does not state that it is read-only, what happens if the ADR is not found, or any error behavior. For a simple read operation, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, scope, and key detail (## headings, document order) with no wasted words. Highly concise and clear.

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?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential return value (section names) and scope. It could mention the return format (array vs. string) but that is a minor gap. Overall adequate for a straightforward read tool.

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%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 verb ('List'), the resource ('one ADR's top-level (##) section names'), and the scope (single ADR). It distinguishes from siblings like read_adr_section (reads content) and search_adr_sections (searches) by specifying it lists only top-level headings in order.

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 implies when to use it (when you need just the section names of a specific ADR) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No mention of read_adr_section for content or list_adrs for all ADRs. Guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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