List tool categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the return content (category descriptions and per-category tool counts), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether the list is exhaustive. For a harmless zero-param read this is acceptable but thin.

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 sentence that leads with the action and resource and then specifies the payload. No filler, no redundancy, nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing what each entry contains (description + tool count). For a simple, parameterless listing tool this is essentially complete; only return ordering/format remains unspecified.

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 has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description's mention of per-category fields is a return-value detail, not a parameter detail.

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 states a specific verb (List) and resource (categories) and even clarifies the payload: a description plus tool count per category. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings get_tool or search_tools, but the resource is distinct enough that confusion is unlikely.

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?

Usage is only implied: as a zero-parameter enumeration tool it is obviously a discovery/browsing entry point, and an agent can infer that from the name and payload description. No when-to-use versus alternatives (e.g., use this before search_tools to pick a category) is stated, and no exclusions are given.

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