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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-open-world behavior, and the description adds real context beyond them: 'Cache-only' and 'updated_at is null when no listing is cached' tell the agent results may be stale and how to detect an empty cache entry. It doesn't say how the cache is refreshed or how large the list can be.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the follow-up route, then the freshness caveat. No filler or repetition.

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?

With an output schema and full annotations, the description only needs purpose, follow-up routing, and cache caveats — all present. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this no-arg catalog tool correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds meaning about the output fields' freshness semantics (updated_at null = no cached listing), though the output schema already documents the shape.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List published browse categories') and immediately names the returned fields (slug, display name, updated_at). An agent can distinguish this catalog-listing tool from the product/search siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent onward: take a slug and hit /api/public/browse/{slug} to fetch cached products, which effectively points at lianex_browse_by_slug. It stops short of naming the sibling tool or stating when-not to use this one, so a small inference remains.

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