List ECC subdomains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description usefully discloses the fixed result size (28 items) and returned fields, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or caching behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, scope stated first, optional narrowing second. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 parameterless-safe listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential return shape and the filter option. Only the relationship to the sibling list tools is left unexplained.

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% and all three params are self-documented, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes the domain filter intent but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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), resource (ECC subdomains), and enumerates what each entry contains: codes, titles, objectives, control counts. The mention of limiting to one domain hints at the split with ecc_list_domains, but the contrast with that sibling is only implicit.

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 optional domain-filter sentence implies when to narrow the call, but nothing states when to prefer this over ecc_list_domains or ecc_families, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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