coda_list_controls

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavior. It only says 'list' which implies read-only, but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination limits, response format, or side effects.

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?

The description is extremely short (4 words), but this is underspecification rather than conciseness. It lacks front-loaded key information and every word could be expanded to provide value.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover pagination, sorting options, or what a 'control' is, leaving the agent without sufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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 reported as 0%, meaning the parameter descriptions in the schema are minimal or not counted. The tool description does not explain or augment the parameters (docId, limit, pageToken, sortBy), leaving their purpose and usage unclear 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'controls', and the scope 'in a doc'. It is specific about what the tool does, but it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like coda_list_columns or coda_list_tables, lacking unique context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling list tools, the description should indicate scenarios, but it offers no such context or exclusions.

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