Get CI/CD Catalog Resource

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. Description adds value by noting paginated versions and components, indicating multiple sub-resources are returned and pagination is supported.

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 a single sentence with no waste, but it omits essential parameter information. It is concise but incomplete, leading to a middling score.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to identify the resource, use pagination, or filter components, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 0%, and the description provides no details about the 8 parameters. It only hints at pagination and components but does not explain parameter usage, names, or constraints. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'one GitLab CI/CD Catalog resource', and specifies it includes paginated versions and components. This distinguishes it from the sibling 'gitlab_list_ci_catalog_resources' which lists multiple resources.

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?

Description implies usage by mentioning included data (versions, components) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'gitlab_list_ci_catalog_resources' or when not to use it.

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