Get Page Categories Tool

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond it — nothing about whether results are paginated, ordered, truncated by limit, or what happens for a missing page. For a simple read this is acceptable but adds no value over the structured metadata.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the scope constraint. Efficient, though its brevity borders on underspecification rather than crispness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the schema fully documents the inputs. Still, for a lookup keyed on page title there is no note on title normalization or failure behavior, leaving a small but real gap.

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?

All three parameters are fully documented in the schema, including defaults and the max for limit and the show_hidden default, so the description needs no compensation. It adds nothing about the title parameter's resolution (exact vs. normalized title), but baseline 3 applies at 100% coverage.

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 and resource: 'Get categories that a page belongs to,' which is more precise than the name alone and clearly scopes the result to a single page. It implicitly differentiates from siblings like list_categories_tool (all categories) and get_category_members_tool (members of a category), though it never names them.

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 by the scoping phrase 'that a page belongs to.' No explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the obvious alternative (list_categories_tool) for the reverse lookup direction, leaving the agent to infer the split.

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