Oura collection catalog

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context by specifying the content (19 collections, their contents, and parameters) and the intended purpose as a lookup reference. It does not contradict annotations, though it doesn't detail return format or structure, which is acceptable given the simple read-only nature.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first establishes the tool's content, the second provides usage guidance. Every word adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only catalog with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states what the tool contains, how many collections, and when to use it. No additional behavioral or return-detail is necessary for the agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description references parameters taken by collections, which is content detail rather than tool parameter semantics. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 that this tool provides a catalog of the 19 Oura collections, what each carries, and which parameters it takes. It uses a specific verb ('catalog') and resource ('Oura collections'), distinguishing it from the sibling tools 'oura_query' and 'oura_check'.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool 'before oura_query if you are unsure of the exact name', giving an actionable use case and a direct reference to the sibling tool. This provides clear guidance on when to consult the catalog versus querying directly.

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