daz_browse_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses that it searches all configured directories, deduplicates by filename, and that sort_by only supports 'name'. This covers key behavioral traits for a read-only listing tool. Minor omission: no mention of error behavior for invalid categories.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary, then details, args, returns, and an example. Every sentence serves a purpose without fluff. The example is helpful.

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 (2 parameters, read-only), the description covers purpose, parameters, return structure, and deduplication behavior. With an output schema present, return details are sufficient. Missing edge cases like invalid category path, but overall complete for the tool's complexity.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema), so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains both parameters: category_path as a relative path with an example, and sort_by as currently supporting only 'name'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/default.

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 lists .duf content files in a category path. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('content files'), and distinguishes it from siblings like daz_list_categories by focusing on browsing files within a category, not listing 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 implies usage for browsing files by category but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as daz_list_categories or daz_get_content_info. No guidance on when not to use it is provided.

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