runrunit_list_cursor_catalog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses a meaningful side-effect boundary ('Does not copy files') and indicates a read-oriented discovery purpose. It could add more on return shape or error behavior, but for a simple listing tool this is solid.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words: the main action, the filters, the intended usage, and the key side-effect caveat are all front-loaded and relevant.

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?

The description explains what will be discovered ('ids and descriptions'), which partially compensates for the missing output schema. Given the low complexity and fully documented optional parameters, the definition is nearly complete, though explicit return formatting is not described.

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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented with descriptions. The tool description only echoes the filter names (platform, technology, utility) without adding meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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?

States a specific verb ('List'), exact resource ('bundled Cursor skills and agents from cursor-catalog.json'), and optional filters. It also distinguishes itself from install-style siblings by explicitly noting it does not copy files.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use the tool: 'Use before install to discover ids and descriptions.' The 'Does not copy files' line provides a clear exclusion against using it for installation, though it does not name the install_* siblings as alternatives.

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