get_catalogs

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires special permissions. This minimal disclosure is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that immediately convey the tool's purpose and key capabilities. No wasted words, and the most important 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 query tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, authentication, or the shape of returned data. It is minimally complete but has 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context that the tool uses OData 3.0, which is relevant for formatting parameters, but does not provide additional detail beyond the schema descriptions. The value added is marginal.

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 that the tool retrieves data from 1C catalogs using OData 3.0, and lists supported operations (filtering, sorting, pagination). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_documents or get_report, which target different data types.

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 usage for catalog data retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool, nor does it mention alternatives. The context from sibling names provides some inference, but no clear guidance is given.

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