Return the filterable aicoolies catalog index. Equivalent to GET /api/agents/context. Optional category slug, include list, and compact slug-only mode.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| compact | No | If true, return slugs only | |
| include | No | Comma-separated collections: tools,comparisons,reviews,stacks,use_cases,categories,tags | |
| category | No | Category slug, for example ai-native-ides |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It adds the 'Equivalent to GET /api/agents/context' detail and mentions the compact slug-only mode, which are genuinely behavior-revealing. However, it does not mention return format, default behavior, pagination, or error cases, so coverage is only partial.
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 sentences with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded. The endpoint and optional modes are stated compactly. Slightly more structure or clarity around the include parameter would be an improvement, but the definition is efficient.
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 GET-style catalog tool with zero required parameters, the definition is usable. However, there is no output schema and no description of the returned catalog structure, what 'context' means here, or how include interacts with the returned index, so an agent is left to infer important behavior.
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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description lightly reinforces category, include, and compact modes but adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?
The description states a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('filterable aicoolies catalog index'), and reinforces it with the REST endpoint. It is clear enough to distinguish from sibling tools, though it does not explicitly name or contrast those alternatives.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus search_tools, get_tool, or get_catalog_meta. The optional parameters suggest it is a listing/filtering endpoint, but exclusions and alternative-selection conditions are left entirely implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: fetching catalog context, fetching metadata, getting one tool by slug, listing developer resources, and searching the catalog. The boundaries are clear and unlikely to cause misselection.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_catalog_context, get_catalog_meta, get_tool, list_developer_resources, search_tools. The naming style is uniform and predictable.
Five tools is well-scoped for a read-only catalog server. Each tool covers a distinct need without unnecessary bloat or redundancy.
The surface covers catalog listing, metadata, direct item retrieval, search, and developer resources. For a public read-only catalog API, this is a complete and useful set with no obvious dead ends.