tenant_catalog

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses behavioral traits: MODE: read, AUTH: OAuth 2.0 required, CREDITS: 0 (free), and explains that scanning triggers a background job. It also describes the output of two sub-operations. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with sections (MODE, AUTH, CREDITS, OUTPUT, WHEN TO USE) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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 (multiple actions, background job, caching), the description covers authentication, credits, usage patterns, and expected outputs for the two main sub-operations. Despite no output schema, the description compensates adequately. Sibling tools are listed, adding context.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the sub-operations in context and providing usage patterns (e.g., 'Poll with get_scan_status'). It also clarifies that network_code is required for network-scoped operations.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Scan and cache the tenant's GAM inventory catalog for fast downstream operations.' It uses specific verbs ('Scan and cache') and clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting that other tools use the catalog for fast lookups.

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 provides explicit when-to-use instructions: 'Run scan_network once after connecting a new GAM network, then call refresh periodically (daily) to keep the catalog current.' It also explains that other tools depend on this catalog, implying when not to use alternatives.

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