conferences_by_category

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

Given no annotations exist, the description fully covers behavioral traits: it's a paginated list operation ('one page at a time'), explains the total reachable set ('every conference in it is reachable'), and documents the page size ('about 20 per page'). This provides complete transparency for a read-only browsing tool.

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 sentences with zero waste. The first sentence clearly states the function, and the second provides essential usage guidance about iterating pages. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool has an output schema, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It has 2 simple parameters with 100% schema coverage, no annotations needed, and the description completely covers the tool's purpose, usage pattern, and behavioral scope. No gaps remain.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters well (category as a string from list_categories, page as integer with default 1 and 1-based). The description adds context that page iterates to total_pages, but this is implied by pagination behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('List conferences') and explicitly names the resource ('WikiCFP category' with pagination behavior). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like search_conferences or find_conferences by focusing on category browsing rather than search.

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 states this is 'the complete view of a category' and provides explicit instructions on how to use it: iterating page from 1 to total_pages. It implies this is the right tool when you want to see all conferences in a specific category, contrasting with a search tool. Sibling names provide additional context for alternatives.

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