list_catalogs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes the operation as listing (read-only) and explains pagination behavior. However, it doesn't disclose potential errors, authentication requirements, or performance characteristics.

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 concise with clear sections for Args and Returns. Every sentence is informative, and there is no superfluous text.

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?

Given the sibling context and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure (Page_Response), parameter usage, and connection to query_catalog. However, it could mention sorting or filtering details.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining offset and limit parameters, including defaults and range (1-100). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 tool lists loaded OSCAL Catalogs with summary metadata, specifying returned fields. It also hints at how the output is used with query_catalog, distinguishing it from sibling list tools for other entities.

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 explains that the returned UUIDs/titles should be used as query_value in query_catalog for detailed results, implying when to use this tool (summaries) vs alternatives (detailed queries). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list other alternatives.

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