get_catalog_info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it disclose any side effects, authentication needs, or error handling. For a simple get, the read-only nature is implied but not confirmed.

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 two sentences plus an Args line, front-loading the main purpose. The Args section is justified given the schema's lack of descriptions, making it efficient 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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists expected return fields (product count, vertical, name, connected event sources), and clarifies the single parameter. For a simple retrieval tool, this provides adequate completeness, though error handling is omitted.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds 'Product catalog ID (numeric string)' for the single parameter, clarifying that it expects a numeric string. This adds meaningful context beyond the raw 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 retrieves catalog details and lists specific attributes (product count, vertical, name, connected event sources). It distinguishes itself from numerous sibling 'get_' tools by focusing on catalog information.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no context on prerequisites or exclusions. Among many get_* functions, the usage context is implied but not explicit.

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