EVDS konu kategorileri

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds a useful behavioral constraint beyond annotations: EVDS_API_KEY is required. It also communicates the hierarchical/tree nature and the fields returned, which is meaningful context for a zero-parameter 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 compact and front-loads the core topic tree information before the workflow pointer and API-key note. The bilingual repetition is mild redundancy but does not obscure the content.

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 no-parameter, read-only, output-schema-backed tool, the description supplies all essential context: resource identity, fields, workflow position, and auth requirement. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% by definition, so the description cannot add parameter-level detail. Per the baseline for no-parameter tools, this is satisfactory; it does not mislead.

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 clearly identifies the resource: the topic tree of TCMB EVDS statistics categories, and enumerates returned fields (id, name, level, parent). It lacks an explicit verb like 'get/list', but the noun phrase and zero-parameter schema make the operation obvious, and it is distinguishable from sibling evds_veri_gruplari.

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 a clear workflow signal: after fetching categories, the next step is evds_veri_gruplari. It also states the API key prerequisite. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternatives, but for a zero-parameter tree endpoint this is adequate context.

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