get_polyhaven_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the operation type (get) but gives no details about side effects, network dependencies, potential errors, or return format. For a simple read operation, this is a noticeable gap, though not misleading.

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: the first delivers the core purpose, the second lists parameters with terse explanations. Every word earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 tool with 2 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the purpose and parameter semantics sufficiently. It could mention the return value or any practical constraints, but the tool's low complexity keeps the need modest. The missing usage guidance is the main deficit.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by detailing both parameters. It explicitly lists the accepted values for asset_type (hdris, textures, models, all) and explains that user_prompt is for telemetry, adding meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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', the resource 'categories', and the scope 'for a specific asset type on Polyhaven'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_polyhaven_assets or download_polyhaven_asset, which serve different 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?

No explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. While the purpose is clear and implies usage, the description does not mention when not to use it or point to other tools for other needs. This is minimal viable but lacks the explicit differentiation seen in better descriptions.

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