trustmrr_category

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

With no annotations, the description bears the burden of explaining behavior. It states this is a 'Get' operation (implying read-only) and lists the return content, but it does not disclose potential errors, authorization needs, or behavior for invalid slugs. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 two sentences long with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to parse. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly stating the input parameter's role.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It mentions both the category page and the startups with verified revenue/MRR, which is sufficient for an agent to understand the output. No missing critical details.

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% (slug parameter is described as 'TrustMRR category slug'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'TrustMRR category detail', specifying it returns a single category page and startups. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like trustmrr_categories (which likely lists categories) and trustmrr_startup (which likely gets a single startup).

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 retrieving a specific category detail, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., trustmrr_categories for listing all categories) or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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