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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent search. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: it describes the returned fields (id, title, URL) and the partial-match hint behavior when not every query word matches a category.

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 dense but front-loaded sentences with no filler. The id-to-fetch guidance and matching caveat are both relevant and placed where an agent can act on them.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only search with no output schema, the description explains return fields and a notable edge case. It does not mention result limits, ordering, or pagination, but those gaps are relatively minor for this tool.

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 100%, so the query parameter is already documented with examples. The description adds matching context by saying it uses the same matching as search_apps and explains word-level partial matching, but it does not add syntax or constraints beyond the 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search categories and apps.' It distinguishes the scope from search_apps by noting it covers categories as well as apps, but it does not explicitly contrast with other lookup siblings like list_categories or get_category.

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 clear downstream usage by explaining that returned ids should be passed to fetch, including the list:<slug> and app:<slug> formats. It does not explicitly say when to prefer search_apps or other alternatives, so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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