List Full Kill-Chain Scenarios templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'single-APT' scoping detail, which is useful, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or any other behavioral traits. This is a simple list operation, so the added value is modest but not absent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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, zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It clearly states what is listed (Full Kill-Chain Scenarios templates) and the scope (single-APT). Minor gaps include lack of return format, but these are not critical for such a basic operation.

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 baseline is 4. No parameter documentation is needed because the schema is empty. The description adds no unnecessary parameter details.

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 the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'available Full Kill-Chain Scenarios templates,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like cymulate_fkc_campaign_list_templates and cymulate_fkc_scenarios_get_template. The parenthetical '(single-APT)' adds clarifying scope without ambiguity.

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 implies usage—when you need to list available single-APT full kill-chain scenario templates—but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as campaign templates or other template list tools. For a zero-parameter listing operation, this is acceptable but lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance.

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