adobe_catalog_describe

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

Annotations already declare this is a read-only, non-destructive, closed-world operation, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds that the tool returns a full description and input schema, which clarifies the retrieval behavior, but it omits error handling or how to obtain valid tool names.

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 one tightly written sentence with the key purpose front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a simple metadata-lookup tool and contains no filler.

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 read-only metadata tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what is returned. However, it lacks guidance on where valid tool names come from and what happens if the name is invalid, leaving minor gaps for an agent invoking it.

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 schema has zero description coverage for the single 'tool' parameter, so the description must compensate. It provides an example format ('ps1__photoshop_generative_fill'), which adds useful meaning beyond the bare string type, though it does not fully define naming conventions or validity rules.

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 states a specific verb ('describe') and resource ('catalog tool'), making clear it returns a tool's full description and input schema. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like adobe_catalog_search or adobe_catalog_call, but the name and wording are clear enough for selection.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus adobe_catalog_search, adobe_catalog_call, or adobe_catalog_libraries. The intended use—fetching metadata before calling a catalog tool—must be inferred.

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