catalog_get_all_scenario_configs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the endpoint and the 'all configurations for an organization' scope; it does not mention pagination behavior or return format.

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 definition is concise and front-loads the core action. The raw endpoint repeats information also present in the annotation title, but it remains compact and readable.

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 simple read-only list tool with three optional pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It could better clarify that 'all' is still paginated and that organization scope comes from the authenticated context.

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 page, size, and sort are already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, which is acceptable at baseline.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves all notification scenario configurations of an organization.' The plural 'all' helps distinguish it from singular sibling tools like catalog_get_scenario_config, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Retrieves all notification scenario configurations,' but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to sibling tools such as catalog_get_scenario_config or catalog_get_catalog_items.

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