catalog_get_page

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the description's main added value is noting that results are paginated. It does not mention the admin permission requirement or anything about ordering of results beyond the schema's sort parameters.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, but the first and second sentences overlap ('Fetch catalog sources' / 'Returns a paginated list of catalog sources'), and the raw GET path duplicates the annotation title rather than adding information.

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 read-only list tool with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, most of what an agent needs is present. However, there is no explanation of what a 'catalog source' contains, no default pagination behavior, and no return-shape guidance, even though no output schema exists.

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 the schema already documents all nine parameters, including pagination and sort semantics. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, which is acceptable at baseline but leaves no extra value.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetching a paginated list of catalog sources. It is clearly a read/list operation, but it never distinguishes itself from nearby siblings such as catalog_get_admin_sources_by_source_id or catalog_get_types.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the admin scope implied by the endpoint path. The agent must infer everything from the name and siblings.

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