get_catalog_item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description does not contradict them. The phrase 'including its variables' adds a small amount of context about response content, but the description does not disclose response format, error behavior, or other behavioral nuances.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and object, and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 read-only getter with one well-documented parameter and safety annotations, the description is mostly adequate. It conveys purpose and a key inclusion ('variables'), though without an output schema it could more explicitly describe the full response shape.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with the parameter sys_id_or_name already described as 'Catalog item sys_id or name'. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'catalog item' and states it returns full details including variables. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_catalog_items, create_catalog_item, update_catalog_item, and order_catalog_item.

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 clearly implies use when full details of a single catalog item are needed. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the singular 'a catalog item' and 'full details' provide enough context to differentiate from listing or creating items.

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