scpi_catalog

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses pagination ('10 per page'), filter precedence ('command ignores other filters'), scope limitation ('No scope access'), and a required workflow step. It stops short of explicitly saying the operation is read-only, but 'Browse' and 'Fetch details' strongly imply that.

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 short sentences, each carrying distinct information. The browse/detail purpose is front-loaded, and the warnings and workflow guidance are compressed without losing clarity.

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 five optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers browse, detail, filter, pagination, scope boundary, and the execution workflow. Offset semantics are only implicit, and the return shape is not specified, but the tool is simple enough that an agent can invoke it correctly.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema: '10 per page' gives paging semantics to limit/offset, 'pass command... signature, parameter types/enums' adds detail to the command parameter, and 'command ignores other filters' clarifies parameter interaction. This compensates for the 60% schema coverage gap on limit/offset.

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 opens with 'Browse DHO814 command names' and clearly distinguishes catalog browsing from detail retrieval ('pass command for one signature, parameter types/enums and manual section'). 'No scope access' and 'Fetch details before scpi_execute' orient this tool against sibling scope-control and execution tools.

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 explains the two main usage modes, browse vs exact command lookup, and gives filter direction ('Filter by subsystem or search'). 'command ignores other filters' is a concrete exclusion, and 'Fetch details before scpi_execute' provides workflow guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives for when not to use this tool, but the usage context is clear.

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