get_category_attributes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the returned fields (id, name, value_type, required flag, allowed values for closed lists) and the concrete validation behavior that required attributes must be supplied to create_item. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or read-only safety, but the workflow and return-shape disclosures are substantial.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and workflow position, followed by the consequence of omission and the return shape. Every sentence adds actionable information with no filler.

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 enumerating the key return fields and explaining how they feed into create_item. The single-parameter input is fully covered by the schema, so nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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% and category_id is already documented as the id returned by predict_category. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource: get the attributes defined for a Mercado Livre category. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like predict_category and get_category by scoping it to attribute definitions and allowed values, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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 prescribes workflow order: call AFTER predict_category and BEFORE create_item. It also explains why — to discover mandatory attributes and allowed values — and names the alternative consequence (publication rejected if required attributes are omitted).

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