keepa_category_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It states 'comprehensive category analysis' but never discloses whether this is read-only, what data it returns, any limitations, or side effects. The description lacks essential behavioral context.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose. It avoids unnecessary filler, though the information provided is somewhat generic. It's appropriately brief.

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 complexity with 7 parameters, enums, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the analysis output looks like, how parameters interact, or any usage context. This is a significant gap for a tool with such rich configuration.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, nor does it clarify relationships between parameters. It's acceptable but not enhancing.

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 identifies the tool as a comprehensive category analysis for finding best products, opportunities, and market insights. It uses specific verbs and a resource, though it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like best_sellers or product_finder. Overall, it's clear but somewhat generic.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where another tool would be appropriate. This leaves the agent without clear decision criteria.

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