Jisr data catalog

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond them: the tool returns no records, explains pagination semantics, and indicates data freshness. This helps the agent set expectations for the response without contradicting any annotation.

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 tight sentences convey scope, content, pagination behavior, freshness, and a key exclusion ('Returns no records') with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 low-complexity read-only catalog tool with one optional parameter and rich annotations, the description covers the essential context: what the catalog contains, pagination, freshness, and the absence of records. It does not enumerate the actual domains, but that is inherently the tool's output rather than a precondition.

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 100% and the schema already describes the only parameter, 'domain', as 'Limit the catalog to one domain.' The description adds context about domains but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 names a specific verb ('Describes') and resource ('available Jisr domains'), and enumerates the concrete contents: tools per domain, classified field groups, pagination, and data freshness. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from data-returning siblings by saying 'Returns no records.'

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 gives clear context for when to call this tool: when an agent needs to understand which Jisr domains exist, which tools serve them, and how pagination/freshness behave. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the contrast with record-returning sibling list tools is implied by 'Returns no records.'

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