category_get

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

With no annotations, the description must carry transparency weight. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation, but it does not disclose error behavior, required permissions, or what 'details' encompasses. It provides basic safety information but leaves room for more context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope, earning every word.

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 one-parameter getter, the description is largely complete. It would benefit from specifying what 'details' includes (e.g., name, color), but the lack of an output schema and the tool's low complexity make the current description sufficient for selecting the tool.

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 schema already documents the only parameter 'id' with a description ('Category ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so it appropriately rests on the schema's clarity.

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 'Get details of a specific category' clearly identifies the action (get), resource (category), and specificity (specific vs list). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like category_list and category_create, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 a specific category ID is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives nor provide exclusions. It relies on the inherent contrast with category_list, so guidance is only implied.

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