Finds categories whose path contains the query (case-insensitive substring), optionally within one taxonomy. Free. Returns up to limit hits with id and path; pass the id as category to the paid tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | Words to look for in category paths. | |
| taxonomy | No | Taxonomy of the target category. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavior: matching is case-insensitive, matching is on category paths, taxonomy filtering is optional, the tool is free, and results are capped at `limit` and include id and path. It does not cover rate limits, error behavior, or ordering, but it covers the essential runtime behavior well.
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 packed sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, then the key qualifiers and downstream usage. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is redundant.
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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description does a good job of stating what the tool returns (hits with id and path) and how to chain it to paid sibling tools. Minor gaps include no mention of empty-result behavior or any pagination/ordering beyond the limit, but for this tool's simplicity, the definition is nearly complete.
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 description coverage is 67%, so the description must add value beyond the schema. It does: it clarifies that `query` is matched as a case-insensitive substring, that `taxonomy` is optional, and that `limit` caps the number of returned hits. This meaningfully supplements the schema descriptions.
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 uses a specific verb ('Finds') and resource ('categories whose path contains the query'), with explicit matching semantics: case-insensitive substring. It is clearly distinct from the sibling scoring tools, though it does not name them explicitly.
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 gives clear context: this is a free lookup tool to find categories, optionally within a taxonomy, and the returned id feeds the paid tools. It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or list alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: taxonomy discovery, category lookup, scoring, pass/fail gating, and phrase bank retrieval. Overlaps like score's included phrase bank are explicitly separated from the standalone phrases tool.
All names share the consistent topic_scorer_ prefix and snake_case style, making them easy to group. The suffix mixes verbs (find, gate, score) with nouns (phrases, taxonomies), which is a minor deviation from a strict verb pattern.
Five tools is well-scoped for a focused topic-scoring service. Each tool earns its place and there is no obvious bloat or redundancy.
The surface covers the full workflow: discover taxonomies, find categories, score text, gate content, and retrieve phrase banks. No critical operation appears to be missing for the stated purpose.