Get Marking Codes in Document

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose if the tool is read-only, auth requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. The endpoint suggests a GET request, but no explicit behavioral traits are stated.

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?

One sentence plus the endpoint URL, which is concise but lacks structure. No markdown or sections. Could benefit from clearly separating the action from the endpoint.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain what is returned (e.g., list of CIS codes). It does not mention pagination, format, or any additional details. For a simple list tool, the description is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (pg: 'Product group code', docId: 'Document ID'). Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Get list of marking codes (CIS) included in a document'. The endpoint URL is provided, and the tool is well-distinguished from siblings like chz_cis_search and chz_cis_info by focusing on document-specific codes.

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 vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. For example, users must know the product group (pg) and document ID (docId) beforehand, but no hint is given.

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