list_catalog_registry

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

Given the absence of annotations, the description supplies transparency by noting it returns 'all non-deleted catalogs and aliases' and gives a typical scale estimate. It also details the response JSON structure. It stops short of explicitly stating there are no side effects, though 'queries' implies read-only.

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 well-organized with clear sections: purpose, usage note, args, returns, and an example. Every section contributes necessary information and no sentence is wasted.

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 one-parameter discovery tool, the description covers the action, use context, parameter format, return schema, and an example. It is a self-contained explanation that leaves no critical questions about how to invoke it.

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 input schema only lists 'hostname' with no description. The description's Args section clarifies it is a server hostname with concrete examples, providing essential semantics that the schema alone lacks.

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 a specific action: 'List all catalogs and aliases available on a Deriva server.' It further explains it queries the ermrest registry, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like connect_catalog or create_catalog which have different functions.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Use this to find catalogs before connecting,' providing a clear temporal use case. However, it does not name alternative tools for when the catalog is already known, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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