get_gcat_psatcat

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral info. It states the tool is for lookup and returns mission-level data, but does not disclose error handling, authentication needs, or rate limits. It mentions default limit but is otherwise sparse.

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 well-structured with a clear header, usage note, content description, and argument list. It is concise but includes necessary details, though some redundancy exists (e.g., repeating 'by identifier' in two places).

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain return values. It describes the record content (program, result, etc.) and references a sibling for field details. However, it does not specify output format, pagination, or error behavior, leaving gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains jcat and name as alternative search keys with examples, and describes limit. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though it does not specify validation constraints or full format details.

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 that the tool looks up GCAT PSATCAT records by identifier, with specific examples (jcat or name). It distinguishes from siblings via name, but does not explicitly differentiate from query_gcat_psatcat, which could be ambiguous.

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?

It instructs to provide exactly one of jcat or name, and explains the limit parameter. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool over sibling tools like query_gcat_psatcat.

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