app_infos__secondary_category__get

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the resource path. It does not disclose what happens if no secondary category exists, or the response structure, and thus provides little extra transparency.

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 sentence followed by the endpoint path. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no redundant content.

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 read-only getter, the description is adequate: it names the resource and endpoint, while schema and annotations cover parameters and safety. It lacks usage context and return-value details, but given the simplicity of the tool, this is sufficient.

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 both parameters already described. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level details, 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Read') and the resource ('secondary category for an app info'), and the endpoint path provides exact API context. It distinguishes from sibling tools like app_infos__primary_category__get and app_infos__secondary_subcategory_one__get by specifying 'secondary category'.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives such as primary category or subcategory fetchers, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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