List Catalog Item Variables

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description gains credit for adding the default inclusion of variable sets and the specific return fields. It also notes the ability to disable variable sets via a parameter. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 appropriately sized with two short paragraphs. The first states the action and output, the second provides essential usage context and example variable types. Every sentence earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description is complete: it details the return fields, explains when to use it (before submit_catalog_request), and describes the default behavior regarding variable sets. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it mentions variable set inclusion in prose but this is already covered in the include_variable_sets parameter description. The description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 tool lists variables (form fields) for a specific catalog item, enumerating the return fields (names, types, mandatory, defaults, help text). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_catalog_items or get_catalog_item which operate on catalog items themselves, not their variables.

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 states this tool is 'Essential for understanding what data to provide when using submit_catalog_request', giving a clear when-to-use scenario. It does not mention when not to use it or name direct alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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