Get Category Demand

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the payment mechanism ($0.02 USDC via x402) and the fallback behavior without WALLET_PRIVATE_KEY. However, it does not describe the response structure, error handling, or side effects, leaving gaps.

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 sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states core functionality, the second adds critical behavioral context. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (payment, multiple metrics, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It lists returned data dimensions but not their format, lacks error scenarios, and does not clarify how the payment challenge works in detail. Sibling tools are not referenced for context.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description repeats the schema examples without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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's purpose: retrieving demand depth for a category, listing specific metrics (volume, sources, buyer-class share, price points, daily series). It uses a specific verb+resource pattern and distinguishes from siblings like get_intent_reports and get_network_stats.

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 implies usage when category demand data is needed but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It mentions payment requirements but does not compare with sibling tools or provide exclusion criteria.

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