All Categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description 'List' is consistent with a read-only operation. The description adds valuable context by specifying the exact data content (IDs and names) and the index range (0-43), which helps the agent anticipate the output shape. No side effects are relevant, and no contradictions exist.

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, brief sentence that immediately states the action and scope. It contains no filler and is front-loaded with the key information. Every word adds value.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema) and low complexity, the description adequately covers the essential details: what is listed, the specific data fields, and the range. It could theoretically mention the output format, but for a simple list of 44 categories, this is sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description provides no parameter-specific details, but none are needed since the schema is empty and the operation is clear.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource: 'all RS3 Grand Exchange category IDs and names' with the range '(0-43)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_category_info, which likely targets a single category. The scope is unambiguous.

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 implies usage: call this tool when you need all category IDs and names. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_category_info or browse_items. No exclusions are stated, so it is minimally adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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