category_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses the read-only nature via '[READ]', explains the limit behavior (default 500, capped read, result fields returned/limit/truncated), and mentions the target parameter's role. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences for the main purpose and two lines for arguments. Every sentence adds value with no fluff 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?

For a simple 2-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the returned fields and behavior. It could be improved by noting the response structure (e.g., array of objects) or pagination, but it is sufficient for typical use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains both parameters: limit (max rows, default 500, reporting returned/limit/truncated) and target (Prism Central target from config, omit for default), adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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 starts with '[READ]' and clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'categories', specifying the returned fields (extId, key, value, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like category_create and category_assign, and from other list tools by resource.

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 implies usage for reading categories and mentions the Prism Central target, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling list tools (e.g., snapshot_list, host_list) or when not to use it.

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