list_tools_by_category

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the purpose. It does not disclose behavior for edge cases like invalid categories, the effect of the limit parameter, or the structure of the returned tool list.

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, but the second sentence is largely redundant with the first. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff, though it could be condensed further.

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 tool is relatively simple, but the description misses key context such as the special 'all' category value and how the limit parameter interacts. Since the schema covers these details, the description is minimally sufficient but not rich enough for a complex tool.

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 input schema already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so it relies entirely on the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 tool lists tools by category, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_tools by focusing on category-based listing. The second sentence adds specificity about 'all tools under the specified category'.

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 the tool is for listing tools by category but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over search_tools or get_tool_definition. The schema hints at using 'all' for all categories, but the description itself does not offer alternatives or exclusions.

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