Get Cwe Catalog

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does so by explaining the returned fields and, importantly, calling out the disabled-CWE edge case as a normal informational response rather than an error. It does not discuss authentication or side effects, but for a read-only status tool the main behavioral surprise is covered.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states action and resource, the second gives the return shape, and the edge-case clarification earns its place. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

This is a simple status tool and the description covers return semantics and the disabled-case behavior, aided by the presence of an output schema. However, the complete absence of server_version guidance is a real gap: an agent cannot reliably know what to pass for a required field.

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 input schema has one required parameter, server_version, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or explains what values or formats are expected. The description adds no meaning beyond the bare property name.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('platform's CWE reference catalog status'), and further clarifies what is returned (`{enabled, current_version, entry_count, versions}`), which distinguishes it from sibling CWE-related tools like get_model_cwe_tags or classify_model_cwe.

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 the tool is used when an agent needs CWE catalog status, such as checking whether CWE classification is enabled, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. The sibling list contains related tools, but the description does not route between them.

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