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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to state safety. It adds context about filtering by issuer, margin, and maturity, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose behaviors like defaulting to excluding matured series (though schema says default false) or that issuer matching is case-insensitive (schema covers that). The description adds minimal context beyond schema and 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 description is a single sentence, concise with no fluff. It front-loads the key criteria (issuer, margin, maturity). It's efficient, though 'z Catalyst' is redundant as the tool name implies it.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain that results are filtered by sector or equity symbol, nor does it clarify that margin filter only applies to floating rate bonds. However, since there is no output schema and no nested objects, the tool might return a simple list, and the description provides a basic picture of what it returns.

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 high at 88%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description mentions 'marży' (margin) and 'termin wykupu' (maturity), which maps to marginPctMin and maturityWithinDays, but doesn't add new meaning beyond what schema provides for those. Overall, the description adds little value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool finds bond series from Catalyst by issuer, margin, and maturity date. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like get_bond_orderbook, which also deals with bonds, though get_bond_orderbook is likely about orders rather than series.

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?

The description implies usage for filtering bond series, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like get_bond_orderbook or get_company_analysis. It also doesn't mention that all parameters are optional or that the tool returns series based on filters, which is implicit.

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