catalog_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Counts' and 'local CubeMX database' imply a read-only, lightweight inventory operation, but the description does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or return format. It adds some context but leaves gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 short sentences with zero waste. It front-loads what is counted and follows with a clear usage cue.

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?

For a parameterless inventory tool with no output schema, the description lists the categories that will be counted, which is sufficient to understand the return value at a high level. It could be slightly more explicit about the response shape, but the core information is present.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description appropriately does not waste space describing nonexistent inputs.

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 gives a specific verb ('Counts') and enumerates the resources being counted: MCUs per family, boards, IP mode files, config files, and FreeMarker templates. It clearly tells an agent what the tool produces, though it does not name a specific sibling alternative to distinguish it from, only generically saying 'Use before searching.'

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 'Use before searching' explicitly states when to use the tool: prior to search operations. It does not spell out when not to use it or name particular search siblings (e.g., mcu_search, board_search), but the intended context is clear.

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