list_compliance_controls

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds the filterable dimensions but says nothing about pagination limits, default/max record counts, or return format—modest added context beyond annotations.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the tool's identity and immediately followed by allowable filters. No redundant or filler text.

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 read-only listing tool with 7 optional parameters, high schema coverage, and annotations covering safety, the description gives enough context to select and call it correctly. Minor gaps around limit/pagination and non-filter parameters are acceptable because those are documented in the schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 86%, so most parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the state, category, and profile filters and clarifies that 'profile' means the Entity it protects, but adds little beyond the schema and omits meaning for limit, query, key_control, and display_value.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Compliance Controls') with the underlying table name, and notes supported filter dimensions. It is distinguishable from mutation siblings like create_compliance_control, but does not explicitly differentiate from read siblings such as get_compliance_control or list_control_objectives.

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?

Implies usage as a filtered listing tool by naming state, category, and profile filters, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to siblings like get_compliance_control or list_control_objectives. The agent must infer that this is the bulk retrieval tool.

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