list_categories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type (UUIDs and document counts), which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state whether this is a read-only operation, whether authentication is required, or if pagination applies. For a simple list operation, this is acceptable but not deeply transparent.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads the tool's core function and output, and the second provides practical usage guidance. There is no redundant or irrelevant content.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It specifies what the tool returns (UUIDs and document counts) and how to use the returned IDs in related operations. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool appropriately.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter details to explain. Schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description still adds value by referencing the categoryIds parameter used in other tools, helping the agent connect this tool's output to other operations. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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?

Description clearly states the specific action: 'List the document categories in the knowledgebase, with their UUIDs and document counts.' This distinguishes the tool from siblings like search_documents or read_document, which handle different resources. The scope is unambiguous and the output characteristics are mentioned.

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 explicitly directs when to use the tool: 'Use these ids for the categoryIds parameter when creating/updating documents or when scoping ask_ai retrieval.' This provides clear context for why an agent would call this tool. It doesn't name alternatives because no sibling provides category listing, so explicit exclusions are unnecessary. Slightly less than 5 because it doesn't explicitly state 'use this instead of X.'

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