get_polyhaven_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic purpose without disclosing any behavioral traits like side effects, rate limits, or error behavior. For a read-only query, it is minimal.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus parameter list. It is front-loaded with the purpose and wastes no words. Every line adds value.

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 and lack of output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It explains what it does and the parameters, but omits expected return format, possible errors, and edge cases. A more complete description would mention the return structure.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the tool description explains both parameters: asset_type with allowed values and user_prompt as telemetry. This adds significant value beyond the schema, which only has defaults. A higher score would require more detail on parameter constraints.

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 action ('Get a list of categories'), the resource ('for a specific asset type on Polyhaven'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like search_polyhaven_assets and download_polyhaven_asset. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as search_polyhaven_assets for searching assets. The description lacks context for when this tool is appropriate or when to choose another.

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