sigma_list_workbook_controls

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, response structure, required permissions). It does not contradict annotations.

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 with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential purpose clearly and succinctly.

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 read-only list tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It falls slightly short by not clarifying whether the list includes controls from all pages or only top-level workbook controls, but given the simplicity, this is a minor gap.

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 schema has one parameter, workbook_id, with no description (0% coverage). The tool description only says 'in a workbook', which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name and title. It does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 identifies the action (list) and resource (control elements), and specifies the types (filters, parameters). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sigma_list_workbook_elements that likely cover all element types.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as sigma_list_workbook_elements or sigma_list_workbook_page_elements. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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