Kategori Özellikleri (getCategoryAttributes)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the meaning of boolean response fields (required, allowCustom, etc.), which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, mention auth requirements, or discuss rate limits. For a getter, this is adequate but not thorough.

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, efficient paragraph that is front-loaded with the main purpose. All sentences add value, explaining response fields. It is not overly verbose, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 attribute retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides detailed field meanings that are crucial for using the output. It covers the main use case well, but lacks mention of pagination or read-only nature, which would be nice extras.

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 100%, so baseline 3 applies. The description does not add significant meaning to the input parameters beyond what the schema already provides; the schema describes both parameters adequately. The description's value lies in explaining output fields, not parameters.

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 returns category attributes and specifies that attributeId values are used when creating products. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_category_tree or get_category_attribute_values.

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 explains the primary use case (getting attribute IDs for product creation) and defines the meaning of response fields. It does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or contrast with alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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