installed_extensions_from_catalog

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it details the catalog read, deletion-mark filtering, snapshot selection by last-use date/code, and the `EF_`/`#` exclusions. It stops short of explaining side effects or caching behavior, but the core behavior is clearly disclosed.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a compact, well-structured algorithm. Every sentence adds relevant operational detail with no filler.

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?

The algorithm and return filtering are well described and an output schema exists, so return shape is covered. However, the complete absence of parameter explanations and the lack of usage guidance leave the definition less than fully complete.

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%, yet the description does not mention `session_id` or `refresh_cache` at all. Since the schema provides only titles/defaults and the description must compensate, this is a significant gap.

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 clear verb and resource ('return installed extensions' from `Справочник.ВерсииРасширений`) and explains the selection/filtering behavior. It does not explicitly call out the related sibling tools, but the extension-specific scope separates it from generic metadata-object tools.

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?

The use case is implied: call this tool when installed extensions from the latest non-deleted catalog snapshot are needed. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative sibling is mentioned, so an agent must infer the choice.

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