describe_catalog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool returns a 'support matrix' or targeted guidance with specific fields like required_fields, supported_terms, filter_hints, and example_invocation, which is transparent and helpful.

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 concise and well-structured, using bullet points for argument combinations. Every sentence adds value, and there is no fluff.

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?

Despite no annotations, the description comprehensively covers all arguments, usage scenarios, and return values. It even mentions example_invocation, which aligns with the output schema. The tool's contextually complete given its complexity.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so effectively, listing provider values ('aws', 'gcp', 'azure'), domain examples (compute, storage, etc.), and service examples (bedrock, rds, etc.), adding meaning beyond the bare schema.

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's purpose: 'Discover what each provider supports and how to call get_price.' It differentiates from sibling tools like get_price and search_pricing by focusing on exploration and guidance.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Use this before get_price when unsure of exact field names or values.' It also outlines behavior with different argument combinations, though it could mention when not to use (e.g., if you already know the exact fields).

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