fgis_catalog

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's job is lighter. It does add useful hierarchical filtering behavior, indicating that zones inherit a region parent and periods inherit a zone parent, but it does not disclose pagination, result shape, or invalid parent handling.

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 compact sentence with no filler. The semicolon-separated structure efficiently packs the hierarchy into a scannable format.

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 no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description is too thin for an agent to construct a fully correct call. It omits explicit `kind` literals, per-kind `parent_id` semantics, and what the returned list items look like.

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%, so the description must compensate. It suggests that `parent_id` filters zones by region and periods by zone, but it never explicitly maps `kind` to 'regions', 'zones', or 'periods', nor does it state how `parent_id` behaves when listing regions. Exact accepted values are left to inference.

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 a listing operation for price regions, zones, and periods, with an explicit parent-child hierarchy. It is specific enough to distinguish fgis_catalog from the broader sibling tools, though it never explicitly names the `kind` values.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of siblings like fgis_sources, fgis_list_datasets, or fgis_browse_source. The hierarchy hint implies usage, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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