Get Glass Catalogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. 'List' is a reasonably strong read-only, side-effect-free signal, which is the main behavioral trait that matters for a catalog enumeration. It says nothing about ordering, scope, or whether the returned list depends on session/license state.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the verb and the resource with no filler. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 zero-param enumeration tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys the essentials (what is listed, from where). It falls short of fully positioning the tool among the several other glass-catalog siblings, which is the main remaining ambiguity.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to convey; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('glass catalog names installed in Glasscat'), so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not, however, distinguish this from near-siblings like zemax_get_glasses, zemax_filter_glasses, or zemax_export_glass_catalog, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus the adjacent glass-related tools (get_glasses, filter_glasses, export_glass_catalog). The agent must infer usage purely from the name and the word 'List'.

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