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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds meaningful context: it never returns the password itself, and `locked` explains plan/store restrictions with reasons. The closing 'Reads the catalog and changes nothing' reinforces the safety profile without contradicting 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?

The opening clause is front-loaded and the sentence is dense but purposeful, enumerating the fields the agent will receive. It is slightly laundry-list-like, but the length is justified by the breadth of the returned settings.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not define return shape, yet it still summarizes the substantive fields and explains the special `locked` list. Combined with the usage guidance and read-only assurance, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 is only one parameter, and the schema fully documents catalogId as coming from list_catalogs. The description adds no further syntax or format details about the identifier, so baseline 3 applies when schema coverage is 100%.

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 read operation and enumerates exactly what it returns: publish state, custom URL, click behavior, auto-sync, lead form, password status, SEO visibility, viewer styling, share link, embed code, and editor/live-preview links. This is far more specific than the title and clearly distinguishes it from set_publish_options and open_publish_settings.

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?

It explicitly says to use this before set_publish_options and for questions about sharing or whether the catalog is live, which gives the agent a concrete trigger. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives such as get_catalog or open_publish_settings, so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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