searchByCategory

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It accurately indicates a read operation but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, result format, or potential errors. The description is minimally adequate for a straightforward search tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, though it could be expanded slightly without losing conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It omits information about pagination, result count, and how results relate to siblings. For a simple tool this is borderline, but missing pagination details is a notable gap.

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 low (33%): only the 'category' parameter has a description in the schema, which the description reinforces with examples. However, 'page' and 'pageSize' lack any description in the schema or the tool description, leaving their semantics unclear.

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 'search' and the resource 'products within a specific food category', with concrete examples like beverages, snacks, etc. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as searchByBrand or searchProducts, which serve different filtering purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like searchProducts or advancedSearch. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or cases where this tool is not appropriate.

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