list_categories

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one useful behavioral trait — that results are hierarchical with parent categories — but it never says whether hidden categories are returned by default or what the response shape looks like, which matters given the hide_category sibling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool, though the one sentence is doing almost all the work with no supporting detail.

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 listing tool with one undocumented optional parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should at minimum explain the hidden-category default and the returned structure. It gives only the resource scope, so an agent cannot confidently predict what it will receive.

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 0% for the single parameter includeHidden, and the description never mentions it. The parameter name is suggestive, but the description does not state the default behavior (are hidden categories excluded?) or what toggling it does, leaving the agent to guess.

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 ("Показать") and resource (categories of income and expenses), and it adds scope information by noting that parent categories are included. This distinguishes it from the mutation siblings create_category, update_category, hide_category, and delete_category, though it never names the list_instruments/list_accounts family explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the read path for browsing the category tree before, say, calling create_category or hide_category. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_zenmoney_entities or how it relates to summarize_spending, and no exclusions.

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