List Reknihy categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'public' scope, implying no special authorization is needed, and indicates the output is intended for downstream use with search_books. No contradictions with annotations were found.

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 short sentences with no fluff. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds valuable cross-tool context. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only listing tool, the description plus the complete input schema and rich annotations cover the essential information. The tool's output purpose is hinted at by noting that slug/ID can be passed to search_books, and no output schema means the description does not need to explain return fields in 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so page, perPage, and hideEmpty are already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but it does not need to because the schema handles it. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'List public catalog categories.' It also differentiates from sibling tools by explaining that a category slug or ID can be passed to search_books, clarifying the role of this tool in the larger workflow.

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 gives useful context by explicitly linking the output to search_books: 'A category slug or ID can be passed to search_books.' This implies the tool is used to discover valid category identifiers before searching. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement, but the context is clear enough.

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