Show tool and skill catalog

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful disclosure about what the response contains and that config sources are surfaced, but says nothing about size, caching, or whether the catalog can be stale relative to refresh_catalog.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the return contents, followed by one short clause on purpose. Nothing is redundant and nothing could be cut without losing 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?

With four optional parameters, no output schema, and a read-only annotation set, the description does the main remaining job: it tells the agent what the result contains. Only the category filter's purpose is left unexplained, which is a minor omission for a diagnostic tool.

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 only 50%, but the parameters are self-describing: 'type' and 'availability' are closed enums whose values convey their own meaning, and the two prose-documented fields already carry defaults in the schema. The description's mention of 'resolved availability' reinforces the availability enum, so the remaining gap (category's semantics) is narrow rather than disqualifying.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Return the tool catalog') and enumerates what the payload contains: resolved availability, the skill index, and the config sources read. That is far more specific than its sibling systemone_refresh_catalog, though the description never explicitly contrasts the two.

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?

Provides one implied use case ('explaining why a tool was not recommended'), which is genuine context for when to reach for it. It gives no exclusions and never names the obvious alternative (systemone_refresh_catalog, which presumably rebuilds rather than reads the catalog), so the agent must infer the boundary.

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