yagames-categories

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation with no side effects, and the zero-parameter schema confirms no input requirements. It does not describe the return format or potential error conditions, which is a minor gap for such a simple catalog 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 filler. Every word contributes to explaining the tool's function, making it highly efficient.

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 zero-parameter list operation, the description states the essential scope and behavior. It could mention the shape of the returned categories, but the tool is simple enough that an agent can call it without additional context, and no output schema exists to supply that detail.

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?

There are zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond the empty schema. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4, and the description accurately reflects that no arguments are required.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all available game categories/genres on Yandex Games'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like yagames-search or yagames-popular, which target game search or popular content rather than categories.

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 clear context: use this tool when the agent needs the full set of game categories/genres. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but no sibling directly overlaps with category listing, so the usage context is sufficient.

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