get_interest_category

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' without elaborating on return structure, potential errors, or any side effects. For a read operation, the lack of details about what 'details' includes is a notable gap.

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, succinct sentence that immediately conveys the action and resource. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 get operation with two well-documented parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what 'details' are returned and does not clarify its position relative to sibling tools, which is a completeness gap given the presence of similar tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters list_id and category_id are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline for schema-heavy documentation.

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 details') and the resource ('specific interest category'), making the core purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like list_interest_categories or get_interest, which could lead to ambiguity about which tool to invoke for related tasks.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_interest or list_interest_categories. The description simply states what it does without providing context for appropriate use cases or prerequisities.

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