browse_catalog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering and sorting but does not describe important traits such as whether results include summary details, performance implications, or authorization needs. It is adequate but not rich.

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 with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the core action and immediately adds context for usage.

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?

The tool has 5 optional parameters and no output schema. The description does not mention the return format or that pagination is available (though offset/limit parameters are in the schema). It is minimally complete for a browsing tool but could be more explicit about the result shape.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context by linking 'category' and 'popularity' to the sort options, giving meaning beyond the schema's enum labels. This justifies above baseline.

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 the action ('browse'), the resource ('skill catalog'), and the purpose ('discovering skills by category or popularity'). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_skills (text search) and recommend_skills (personalized suggestions) by focusing on filtering/sorting for discovery.

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 tells when to use the tool ('Good for discovering skills by category or popularity'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, though that awareness can be inferred from sibling tool names.

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