get_catalog_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description indicates a read-only download operation and discloses the fusion_user impersonation behavior in the Args section. It does not discuss error handling or authentication, but the download semantics are transparent.

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 a single sentence plus a short parameter list. All information is relevant and front-loaded.

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 simple two-parameter interface, the presence of an output schema, and the clear download behavior, the description provides adequate context. It lacks explicit mention of error conditions or related tool selection, but is sufficient for a basic read tool.

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 description's Args section provides a concrete example for object_path and explains the default for fusion_user, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare property names. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Download') and resource ('catalog object definition (.xdm or .xdo)') and clarifies the purpose ('for inspection'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like deploy_report or query_fusion.

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 phrase 'for inspection' implies the tool is intended for viewing or examining object definitions. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use this tool, so the guidance is clear but not exclusionary.

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