get_curation_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses default behavior (summary) and opt-in extensions, but lacks details on error handling, data freshness, or permissions. It is sufficient for a read-only retrieval tool but could be more 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?

Two sentences efficiently convey purpose and default behavior with no redundant words. The key action is front-loaded.

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?

The description does not specify return format or structure, which is notable given no output schema. It mentions 'curated best-of category data' but leaves expectations vague. Adequate but could be improved.

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 the description does not need to add much. It reiterates 'summary by default' and 'opt-in,' which aligns with schema descriptions but adds minimal new information.

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 'Retrieve curated best-of category data by slug,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'analyze_nutrition' or 'search_products' by focusing on curated lists.

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 mentions returns summary by default with opt-in content, which implies usage context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The sibling tools are clearly different, so the implied differentiation is adequate.

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