Catalog List Agents

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful domain behavior by explaining that agents discover assets and collect metadata into the catalog, and it clarifies that run outputs are accessed elsewhere.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence contributes context: what the tool lists, what an agent does, and which sibling tools handle related actions. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 the output schema, full parameter schema coverage, and annotations that confirm a safe read-only operation, the description is complete for its complexity. It also situates the tool within the agent workflow, so an agent can correctly decide when to call it.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the input schema, including defaults and the substring-match behavior for filter_name. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning, but since schema coverage is 100%, 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 opens with a precise verb and object: 'List SAS Information Catalog discovery agents,' making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes the tool from its siblings by explaining that agents crawl data sources, while catalog_run_agent and catalog_get_agent_history are for starting agents and viewing results respectively.

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 routes the agent to related actions: 'Use catalog_run_agent to start one and catalog_get_agent_history to see what a run produced.' This tells the agent when to use alternatives, implying that this tool is for viewing the configured agent list rather than running or inspecting run history.

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