catia_list_components

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns component metadata and positions, but there is a slight inconsistency: it says 'current positions' are included, yet the schema's include_position defaults to false, implying positions are optional. It does not mention recursion limits beyond parameters.

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?

Single sentence, directly states the operation, no filler. Front-loaded with the core action 'List the components'.

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 read-only list operation with optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and data returned. It does not specify output format or prerequisites beyond 'active assembly', but those are implied. Minor gaps like position default inconsistency are present.

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 100%, so the schema documents all three parameters. The description mentions 'current positions' which relates to include_position, but does not add details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 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?

States the verb 'List' and resource 'components of the active assembly', and enumerates the returned fields (instance names, part numbers, source files, positions). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like catia_bill_of_materials or catia_describe_tree, which serve different purposes.

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 context that it operates on the active assembly, which implies when to use it, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. No guidance on when not to use it or which sibling to choose instead.

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