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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds material context beyond annotations: the generation-authority caveat and cursor pagination defaults/maximum. Return shape is left to the output schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by the usage caveat and pagination constraints. Every sentence adds information with no filler.

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 two-parameter read-only catalog tool with full annotations and an output schema, the description covers tenant scope, the authority caveat, and pagination constraints. Little else is needed for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains that pagination is by stable ID cursor and restates the limit default of 50 and maximum of 100, partially compensating, but does not explain cursor construction or traversal beyond 'stable ID'.

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 (Read) and resource (configured music available to this tenant), and the resource distinguishes it from sibling catalogs such as catalogs_fonts and catalogs_voices. An agent can identify this as the music-catalog reader without opening the schema.

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?

Clear context for when to use: discovering music configured for the tenant. The caveat that catalog entries do not grant generation authority is a useful usage constraint, though no explicit alternatives are named (none appear to duplicate this resource).

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