list_cds_collections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It reveals that the output consists of search keys for another tool, but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation or other behavioral traits. While helpful, it is not fully transparent about side effects or safety.

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 only two sentences, both tightly packed with essential information. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema). The description fully explains what it returns (hierarchical taxonomy and search keys for a sibling tool) and when to use it. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 has no parameters (input schema is empty), so the baseline per instructions is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info, but it does not contradict or repeat schema information. No further value is needed.

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 'browses the hierarchical taxonomy of CERN Document Server (CDS) collections and sub-collections', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning its relationship to 'search_cds_documents' and providing the resulting search keys for that tool.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('BEFORE searching if you are unsure which collection or category to search in') and what it returns ('exact search keys that can be passed into the doc_type argument of search_cds_documents'). This provides clear guidance on usage and how it relates to an alternative.

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