list_sectors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the tool returns every sector value with a victim count and that the results are authoritative for filter inputs. This goes beyond what the annotations express, though it does not cover sorting or exact response structure.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and output; the second immediately explains the practical downstream use. The key information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-param tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description is complete. It tells the agent what it will get (all sectors with counts) and how to use that result (as filter inputs). Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially irrelevant. The description correctly does not mention any parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% by default. No additional param documentation is needed or possible.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('victim sector/industry value') and clarifies the output includes a count per sector. It also explicitly differentiates itself by stating these values are the canonical inputs for the `sector` filter on `search_victims` and `filter_victims`, distinguishing it from other list tools.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when the agent needs valid sector values for filtering victims. It names the dependent tools (`search_victims`, `filter_victims`) and explains the relationship. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is strong enough to guide selection.

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