Catalog (freely callable)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the concrete output fields (generation slugs, names, platform codes, production spans) and the hierarchical relationship to ws_list_modifications, exceeding the baseline for annotation-covered safety profile.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return values, alternative context, and next step. Front-loaded with the core action, no fluff.

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 tool's simplicity, clear annotations, complete schema, and presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, return data, usage context, and follow-up action, making it fully self-contained.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but it doesn't need to since the schema is explicit.

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 generations for a make/model, with specific return values (slugs, names, platform codes, production spans). It distinguishes itself from ws_list_years by noting it's an alternative for models with many generations.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use as an alternative to ws_list_years for multi-generational models, and follow up with ws_list_modifications using the generation slug. This gives both when-to-use and workflow context.

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