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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world read. The description adds meaningful domain behavior beyond that: this tool exposes the exact controlled vocabulary required by mapsdata_start_scrape, and free-text queries are rejected. It does not cover rate limits or auth, but the core behavioral constraint is disclosed.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with no waste. The critical instruction to call this first and the reason for it are front-loaded, so an agent can act immediately.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description still makes clear that the tool returns the allowed category vocabulary and why that matters for scraping. It does not describe the exact response shape, but for a simple lookup with strong annotations, the description is nearly 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?

Schema coverage is 50%; the query parameter is described as a substring search and the limit parameter has self-evident constraints (min 1, max 50, default 10). The description does not add parameter-level syntax or format details beyond the schema, though it does clarify the conceptual role of the category results.

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 states a specific verb and resource: search the Google Maps business categories that MapsData can scrape. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like mapsdata_start_scrape because it is the category-vocabulary lookup, not the scrape itself.

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?

It gives an explicit ordering instruction: call this first, before mapsdata_start_scrape. It also explains the selection condition and consequence: a scrape's query must be one of these exact categories, and free-text guesses are rejected.

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