get_category_tools

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys a read-only listing operation returning short summaries, which suggests no side effects. However, it does not mention failure modes, authorization needs, or behavior when the category is invalid or empty.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It names the action, the resource, and the output format compactly, making it easy to scan.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is mostly adequate, especially with an output schema available. However, it omits guidance on where to get valid category values and does not position itself relative to adjacent tools such as list_tool_categories or search_tools, leaving some navigational ambiguity.

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%, so the description must compensate for the single 'category' parameter. It only restates that tools are organized by category, without explaining what kind of value is expected (slug, display name), or how to discover valid categories, such as through list_tool_categories.

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 resource ('routed tools in a category'), and states the output shape as 'name + one-line summary'. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like list_tool_categories, which lists categories rather than tools, and get_tool_schema, which focuses on a single tool's schema.

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 the use case through 'in a category', but it never explicitly says when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_tools or list_tool_categories. No when-not-to-use guidance or sibling routing is provided, so the agent must infer the intended context.

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