list_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It is clearly a read-only catalog fetch and it usefully discloses the shape of the returned taxonomy (families, elements/subcategories, types), which substitutes for a missing output schema. However, it says nothing about whether results are cached, paginated, or how large the catalog is.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Slightly dense parenthetical enumeration, but every clause earns its place by describing the returned taxonomy.

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 catalog-listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it names the resource, its scope (active ayuntamiento), and the structure of the returned data. Only the when-to-use framing and any behavioral caveats are missing.

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 single optional 'search' parameter fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: retrieves the catalog of incident typologies (families, elements/subcategories, types) for the active ayuntamiento. This is clearly distinguishable from the sibling tools (whoami, list_ayuntamientos, set_ayuntamiento, resolve_location, etc.), which handle identity, municipality selection, and location rather than taxonomy. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the resource is specific enough.

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 explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives. The phrase 'para el ayuntamiento activo' implicitly signals a dependency on set_ayuntamiento having run first, which is useful implied context, but it is left for the agent to infer. Minimum-viable implied usage.

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