catalog_list_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It explains what agents do (crawl data sources) and implicitly lists agents as a safe read operation. It does not disclose permissions or rate limits, but the behavior is straightforward and well-contextualized.

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 three sentences: the first states the purpose, the second explains the resource, and the third points to related tools. It is efficient, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words.

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 simple list tool with three optional parameters and an output schema, the description fully explains the tool's role, what it returns (agents), and connects it to related actions. No additional context is needed.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add further meaning to parameters like limit, start, or filter_name beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states 'List SAS Information Catalog discovery agents', specifying a concrete verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like catalog_run_agent and catalog_get_agent_history by explicitly mentioning their roles.

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 explicitly directs to use catalog_run_agent to start an agent and catalog_get_agent_history to see results, providing clear when-to-use guidance and alternatives. This helps the agent choose the correct tool.

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