get_catalog_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Fetch') with no side effects, and specifies the returned data includes variables. While it doesn't disclose error handling or exact return structure, for a simple single-object fetch it is adequately transparent. No contradictions with annotations (none exist).

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action, scope, and included data with no wasted words. It is efficient and easily parsed by an agent.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with high schema coverage and no output schema, the description gives enough context: what it fetches and what is included. It could specify the return format or behavior on missing items, but those are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity. The distinction from sibling variable tools is also clear.

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 already fully documents the only parameter 'item_id' with the description 'Catalog item sys_id' (100% coverage). The tool description adds no extra meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 without bonus value.

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 verb 'Fetch', the resource ('a single catalog item'), and the distinguishing scope ('by sys_id, including its variables (form fields)'). It differentiates from siblings like list_catalog_items (which lists many) and list_catalog_item_variables (which lists variables separately), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 use case: when you need a complete single catalog item with its variables. It contrasts with list_catalog_items and list_catalog_item_variables by stating the inclusion of variables, giving context for when to select this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives by name, so it falls short of a 5.

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