list_frmr_documents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool's purpose and typical usage pattern but lacks details on behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error handling. The description is accurate but minimal on behavioral context.

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 zero waste: first states purpose and typical usage, second specifies return types. Front-loaded with key information, appropriately sized for a simple listing tool.

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-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what data is returned and when to use it. However, it could be more complete by mentioning format of returned metadata or any limitations, though not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on purpose and usage without redundant parameter details, meeting the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 resource ('FRMR JSON documents and metadata'), specifying the exact data types returned (KSI, MAS, VDR, SCN, FRD, ADS). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_frmr_document' (retrieves specific document) and 'list_controls' (lists controls rather than documents).

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?

Explicitly states 'This is usually the first tool to call to discover what FedRAMP data is available,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It positions this as a discovery tool, distinguishing it from analysis, filtering, or retrieval tools among siblings.

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