List categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the display-order detail and the dependency linkage to game publishing, which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It lacks return format details, but given the simple list nature and annotation coverage, this is sufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose ('category list, in display order') is front-loaded, followed by practical usage context. Every word earns its place.

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 parameterless, read-only, idempotent list tool, the description provides essential context: the display ordering and its role in game creation. It doesn't detail the return structure, but given the simplicity and that annotations cover safety, the definition is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 the description need not explain parameter meanings. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is nothing to compensate for, and the description does not include any irrelevant parameter-related text.

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 tool lists categories in display order and connects it to the need for a valid categorySlug when publishing games. It differentiates by implying this is the source for valid slugs, distinguishing it from other list tools like list_changelog or list_my_games.

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 instructs to call this before create_game and warns against guessing the categorySlug. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly steers away from hardcoding slugs, making the usage context unambiguous.

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