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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so "Rein lesend" largely restates structured data. The one piece of added value is characterizing the payload as prepared type bundles intended for selection, but nothing is said about volume, pagination, or scope prerequisites.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then sibling routing — a sensible order with no filler sentences. Minor deductions for the redundant "Rein lesend" (already in annotations) and the trailing keyword list ("catalog, preset, template, apply, clear"), which is search-tag noise rather than agent guidance.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the essential context: what a preset is, why you'd list them, and which sibling to use next. Only the shape/size of the returned list is left unstated, which is acceptable absent an output 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing in the schema the description needs to compensate for. No meaningless parameter prose was added.

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?

Specific verb ("auflisten") plus specific resource ("Objekttyp-Presets"), with an inline definition of what a preset is ("vorbereitete Typ-Buendel zur Auswahl") so the agent doesn't need prior domain knowledge. It is clearly not onto_catalog_apply or onto_catalog_index, though that separation is carried mainly by the routing sentences rather than the purpose statement itself.

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?

Explicit entry-point guidance ("Nutze es als Einstieg, wenn ein Scope mit Standardtypen ausgestattet werden soll") plus direct routing: apply via onto_catalog_apply, inspect contents via onto_catalog_index. The agent knows both when to call this and where to go next, with no inference required.

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