get_catalogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read operation that returns a list, but it does not describe pagination behavior, response shape, or any account-level constraints beyond what the schema already covers.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the practical use case is included without unnecessary detail.

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 low complexity of a listing tool, the description sufficiently explains what it returns and why an agent would use it. It would benefit from a brief mention of the response format, but the schema already covers parameters and the purpose is clear.

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?

All three parameters (client_slug, page, limit) already have descriptive schema text explaining their meaning and defaults, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Retorna a lista de todos os catálogos (Lists)' and clearly scopes it to catalogs configured in the account. It also states a concrete use case, discovering catalog IDs, which distinguishes it from related tools like get_catalog_by_id.

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 'Muito útil para descobrir o ID de listas de Produtos' provides a clear context for when this tool should be used: when the agent needs catalog IDs. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the intended use case is clear enough for a straightforward listing tool.

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