get_niche_info

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

The description mentions 'No authentication required' and the data scope '50 available niches', but omits details about what 'niche details' includes, whether the operation is read-only, or potential error states. With no annotations, the description partially covers behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded with the core action, minimal waste. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, input, and a key constraint. However, it could mention the return structure or notable limitations to be fully self-contained.

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% with a detailed description for the 'niche' parameter. The tool description adds an example ('reposteria') and clarifies partial name search, but does not significantly surpass the schema's information. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action 'Get information' on a specific resource 'niche', specifies input method 'by slug or name', and notes a key constraint 'from the 50 available niches'. This is distinct from sibling tools like list_categories.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_categories or search_catalogs. The description only explains what the tool does, not when to prefer it.

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