telemost_catalog

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds meaningful context: the catalog is free, machine-readable, and contains prices/schemas/examples, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences, no redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose and cost, making it concise and well-structured.

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 catalog with one optional parameter, the description covers content and cost. However, missing parameter semantics and no mention of output format leave some gaps.

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?

The sole parameter 'block' has no description in the schema or the tool description. Enum values (data, statistics, ads, reference) are suggestive but the description doesn't explain how to use them to filter the catalog.

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 identifies this as a catalog of paid Telemost tools with prices, schemas, and examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools that return specific data. However, it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb like 'list' or 'get', making it slightly less action-oriented.

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 implies this is a free way to browse paid tool metadata, but it never explicitly states when to choose this over sibling tools, nor does it mention the optional 'block' filter as a way to narrow results.

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