get_objects_in_category

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior beyond the basic listing. It does not disclose what the response contains, whether it returns all object types or just the one specified, or any potential limitations (e.g., pagination, authentication). The description is minimal and lacks behavioral detail.

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 in French that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It is perfectly sized for a simple listing tool.

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 low complexity (2 simple parameters) and no annotations or output schema, the description provides a basic understanding but lacks details about the return format or edge cases. It is minimally viable but leaves room for ambiguity about what objects are listed.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters (id and type) with clear descriptions, covering 100% of the parameter semantics. The description itself adds no parameter information, but it is not needed since the schema is complete.

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 ('list') and the resource ('objects belonging to a category'), which is specific enough to understand the tool's core function. It distinguishes from siblings like add_object_to_category and list_categories, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other listing tools like list_products or list_customers. The description only states what it does, not the context or scenarios where it is preferred.

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