ecfr_list_titles

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

No annotations are provided, but the description accurately describes the tool's behavior (listing all 50 titles with specific fields). It implies a read-only operation, which is transparent for a list tool.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and resource, followed by an illustrative example. Every sentence is informative and concise.

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 listing tool, the description is fully complete: it states what it does, what data it returns, and provides an example of how to use the output.

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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output includes name and last_amended_on, which helps the agent understand what to expect.

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' and the resource '50 CFR titles', and gives concrete examples (Title 48 = FAR, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling search 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 says 'use to discover what's in each title', providing clear context for usage, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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