Get category paths with pagination

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral details: pagination, lexicographic sorting, post counts, and filtering options. No contradictions.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose and efficiently covering filtering and sorting. No redundant 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?

The description explains the return type (pagination with post counts) and provides enough context for a read-only retrieval tool. It lacks details on pagination response structure but that is acceptable given the overall clarity.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add significant new information about parameters beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves category paths for understanding overall category structure, and lists specific use cases like organization, cleanup, migration planning. It distinguishes from siblings like 'esa_get_categories' and 'esa_get_top_categories' by focusing on paths and filtering.

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?

The description specifies filtering capabilities and use cases, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives. However, the context signals and sibling list provide implicit guidance, and the description is clear on its niche.

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