catalog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses caching behavior (Canva profile 24h, designs 10m, media 10m) and the refresh parameter's effect, which is valuable operational transparency for a tool with no structured annotations. It doesn't cover return format or failure behavior, but the caveats are reasonable.

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 relatively short and front-loads the main purpose, but the caching details are presented as a run-on list that could be clearer. Every sentence has a purpose, but the structure is not optimal for a multi-resource catalog tool.

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 no output schema, the description could better explain what the catalog returns and in what format, since an agent needs to know how to parse the results. It also lacks guidance on the relationship to sibling tools like canva_list_designs. The caching info is helpful but the overall picture is incomplete for a tool that aggregates multiple data sources.

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 0% and there is 1 parameter. The description explains refresh=True means 're-fetch', which compensates somewhat for the empty schema property descriptions. However, it doesn't specify the default behavior (currently false per schema) or any format nuances beyond the boolean toggle.

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 states a specific verb+resource with 'ONE call that shows everything usable right now' and enumerates the resources covered (account capabilities, designs, templates, CapCut projects, media). This goes beyond simply restating the 'catalog' name. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like canva_list_designs or canva_whoami, though the 'everything in one call' framing implies aggregation.

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?

Usage is implied: this is a snapshot/overview tool, useful when you need a broad picture rather than specific resources. No explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-sibling guidance is provided. The mention of caching and refresh gives some operational context but not selection criteria.

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