list_controls

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, or side effects. It only states what the tool contains, not how it behaves (e.g., whether it fetches live data or cached).

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?

Single sentence, no filler, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is relevant and informative.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the resource type and content, but misses context like whether results are paginated, sorted, or filtered. Could mention if it returns all controls or supports querying.

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 zero parameters, so the description bears no burden for parameter explanations. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as the description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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 tool returns a 'full compliance control catalog' with 'framework mappings and remediation guidance,' specifying the resource and additional content. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_policies' or 'get_compliance_risk_summary', though the focus on controls is unique.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, filters, or scenarios where this tool is preferred. Siblings like 'check_manifest_compliance' or 'get_violations' suggest different use cases, but no explicit direction is given.

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