metaculus_category_questions

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

No annotations are provided. The description notes it is credential-free and returns normalized rows, indicating a read-only, public operation. It does not mention the max limit or any pagination details, which would enhance transparency.

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 concise with two sentences: the first explains the tool's purpose, and the second lists the allowed slugs. No redundant information.

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?

The description explains the resource and action adequately given low complexity. It lacks details on return format (no output schema), but 'normalized rows' gives some context. The list of slugs is a strong hint for parameter selection.

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% with descriptions for both 'limit' and 'slug'. The description adds value by listing the possible slug values, which is not in the schema. This helps the agent select valid inputs.

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 it returns normalized Metaculus question rows from a public category feed. It lists allowed category slugs, making the resource and action specific. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like metaculus_question or metaculus_questions, which have different scopes.

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 by listing allowed slugs and stating it's from a public feed. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., metaculus_questions for all questions) or exclude cases.

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