Get score by security control

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

The annotations already declare the operation read-only and idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'most recent' qualifier, indicating it returns a snapshot rather than historical data, but does not explain how recent is defined or whether any aggregation logic applies.

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 concise sentence that is immediately understandable. It includes the core verb, resource, and qualifier without filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 read tool with annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It could benefit from stating the output shape or grouping details, but the essential behavior is clear and no output schema exists to compensate for missing information.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics, and the baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4.

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 a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'most recent scores per security control type'. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools focused on activity logs, dashboards, or other data, and the phrase 'per security control type' adds helpful scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative score-related endpoints. It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or contrasts with similar reporting tools, leaving the agent without contextual clues for selection.

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