catalog_get_catalog_item_for_admin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a restatement of the return and the raw endpoint path; it says nothing about admin-level permissions, what the admin view exposes versus the non-admin view, or how expand/includeSource affect the result.

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?

It is short, but the first two sentences say the same thing twice and the third is a raw endpoint. The content is front-loaded but padded with restatement rather than useful detail.

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 say more about what the returned catalog item contains, especially the admin-specific fields. It is minimally adequate for a simple get-by-id tool, but the sibling ambiguity and thin return description leave 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 100%, so all three parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: fetch a catalog item by id. It is clear what the tool does, but it never distinguishes this admin variant from the sibling catalog_get_catalog_item, leaving the agent unsure which one to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. The existence of catalog_get_catalog_item and catalog_get_catalog_items_for_admin makes the missing distinction a real gap, not a trivial one.

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