voidfeed_catalog

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

No annotations are provided. The description describes the tool as listing and returning data, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm safety or mention any side effects or permissions.

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 two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the action and resource. No unnecessary words; every sentence contributes to understanding.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose and return content. It could mention if results are paginated, but for a simple catalog listing, it is sufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is complete. The description adds value by explaining the return content (architectures, quality scores, payment info), which compensates for the lack of parameter details.

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 'List all VoidFeed content types', indicating a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on cataloging content types, unlike other tools like voidfeed_get_content or voidfeed_semantic_search.

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 phrase 'Start here.' provides explicit context that this tool is the first step in exploring what is available. It does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives, but the guidance is strong and actionable.

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