wayfair_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses pagination behavior, output normalization, the returned fields, and that only the trailing category id from a URL is used. This gives the agent a realistic expectation of how input is normalized and what the response contains.

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?

Three sentences cover what the tool does, its input flexibility, output shape, and pagination model. Every sentence is functional and there is no filler.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essential return values, all input formats, and pagination context. An agent has enough information to decide when to call the tool and how to construct a request.

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?

The schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, but the description adds meaningful nuance: accepted forms for category (bare id, 'c'-prefixed id, slug, URL), the trailing-id rule, and the confirmation of real page-based pagination for the page parameter.

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 uses a precise verb-resource pairing: 'Browse a Wayfair category' and 'Returns a Wayfair category page's product grid.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like wayfair_categories and wayfair_product by describing the product-grid scope, the accepted category inputs, and pagination.

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 makes usage obvious: provide a Wayfair category in any of several acceptable forms and receive a paginated product grid. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool versus category-listing or product-detail tools.

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