ikea_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully states that the tool returns one page with real offset/size pagination and sort, and it clarifies the category key format. It does not disclose output structure, sort value constraints, default pagination behavior, or error/edge-case behavior, but it gives a reasonable behavioral baseline.

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-loaded, with the core purpose stated first. There is minor redundancy between 'Browse an IKEA category' and 'a category's product listing' in the same sentence pair, but overall the description is efficiently worded and easy to scan.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a useful but incomplete picture. It covers the main purpose, pagination behavior, and category key provenance, but it omits return payload details, valid sort values, locale/country defaulting behavior, and guidance on when to use this instead of sibling IKEA tools. It is adequate for invocation but leaves notable gaps.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value beyond the schema by explaining that category is 'IKEA's own category key' and exactly how to derive it: from a category URL's trailing -{key}/ segment or a product's category_path field. It also reinforces the semantics of offset/size pagination and sort.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Browse an IKEA category' and 'Returns one page of an IKEA category's product listing.' It is distinguishable from related IKEA siblings like ikea_product and ikea_search by focusing on category-level listing browsing, though it does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings.

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?

Usage context is implied: use this when you need a category's product listing page, and the category key can come from a URL or a product's category_path field. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over ikea_search, ikea_product, or other IKEA tools, nor any exclusion criteria.

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