sassy_tool_catalog

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes full responsibility. It discloses that the catalog is 'Derived live from the registry' to avoid drift, and specifies exact filter behavior ('case-insensitive substring match', 'Empty = all'). This is transparent beyond the bare minimum.

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 split into three tight paragraphs: first the core function, then the rationale for live derivation, and finally parameter specifications. It is slightly verbose with phrases like 'the drift that makes absent lazy-loaded tools look like missing ones,' but every sentence adds value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return details are handled. The description fully specifies the purpose, parameters, and behavioral guarantees, while also addressing broader context like client-agnostic usage and drift avoidance. Nothing essential is missing.

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 0% with no parameter descriptions, but the description fully explains both: 'group: filter to one tool group (see sassy_tool_groups). Empty = all.' and 'query: case-insensitive substring match on tool name or purpose.' This completely compensates for the schema omission.

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 'Catalog every registered tool: name, one-line purpose, group.' This is a specific verb with a defined resource and output. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sassy_tool_groups by focusing on the tool list rather than just groups.

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 provides strong context: 'Client-agnostic capability map for ANY MCP wrapper — enumerate what this server can actually do without loading each tool's schema.' It also references sassy_tool_groups for filtering. However, it does not explicitly name when not to use this tool or list direct alternatives beyond that reference.

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