smm_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only signals read-only intent via 'Read' and cost via 'free'; it says nothing about authentication requirements, rate limits, result volume, or that pagination pages are not a locked snapshot. The duplicated '(free) (free)' also reads as unreviewed boilerplate.

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?

Compact and front-loaded with the verb and resource, but the duplicated '(free) (free)' is pure noise and the single sentence omits any routing information it could have carried at no length cost.

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?

With six parameters, no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what a returned record looks like and how this catalogue differs from the category/detail siblings. Neither is present, leaving the agent to infer the tool's role entirely from the name.

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 schema fully documents q, limit, offset, category, sellable and categoryExact, including their combination semantics. The description adds nothing beyond 'combined filters and pagination', so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Read) and resource (social marketing catalogue) plus the two capabilities on offer: combined filters and pagination. It is clearly distinct from write-side siblings like smm_order/smm_cancel, but it never differentiates itself from smm_categories or smm_service_details, which an agent would plausibly confuse it with.

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?

No when-to-use guidance at all. Nothing tells the agent when to call smm_services versus smm_categories (browse categories) or smm_service_details (drill into one service), which is the core routing decision for this cluster.

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