Get Project Categories

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive safety, and the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the MantisBT API prefixes global categories with "[All Projects] " and this tool strips it so names are usable in create_issue. That transformation is not derivable from schema or annotations, though return shape/pagination is not described.

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?

Front-loads the deprecation and alternative in the first line, then a one-line purpose, then a short behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

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?

Covers deprecation, purpose, alternative, and the prefix-stripping behavior — enough to invoke correctly for a simple single-param read tool. The only minor gap is the exact return structure, which is implied but not stated since no output schema exists.

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 description coverage is 100% with a single documented project_id parameter, so the schema carries parameter meaning fully. The description adds nothing about the parameter (e.g., that only the given project's categories plus global ones are returned), so baseline 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 and resource ("List all categories available for a MantisBT project") and immediately distinguishes itself by flagging deprecation in favor of get_project with include: ["categories"]. An agent can tell exactly what it returns and whether to call it at all.

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?

Explicitly says this tool is deprecated and names the exact alternative invocation (get_project with include: ["categories"]), including the removal version 2.0.0. This is the strongest possible when/when-not guidance.

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