noark5_list_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the two operational modes, the effect of empty arguments, OData filtering syntax with examples, and the return format (formatted list of kode/kodenavn). It does not mention pagination or limits, but the behavior described is sufficient for a simple read-only listing tool.

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-structured, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses concise sections for usage, examples, and arguments. The OData examples are practical and earn their place, and there is no redundant 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 tool is fairly simple with two optional parameters, and the description covers purpose, argument behavior, filtering syntax, and return shape. Minor gaps include not explicitly addressing pagination or whether filters are mandatory for large catalogs, but the description is otherwise complete and actionable.

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 provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter in detail, including example values, the meaning of an empty catalog_name, and the syntax of filter_str with concrete OData examples. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool 'List or search metadata posts (katalogpost) within a specific catalog,' using a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself from general entity search siblings by focusing on katalog metadata and naming concrete catalog examples.

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 description provides practical guidance on when to omit filter_str versus when to provide an OData filter, and explains that an empty catalog_name lists all available catalogs. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use them, but the usage context is clear.

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