Categories — Get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the '[READ]' prefix is largely redundant. The description does add one genuinely useful behavioral detail not in structured fields: amounts are reported in milliunits (1000 = $1.00), which prevents misinterpretation of returned values.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the unit convention. Nothing is wasted and no filler is present.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the milliunits note covers the main interpretive risk. However, for a tool whose schema has 0% parameter documentation, leaving plan_id entirely unexplained makes the definition only minimally complete.

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 0% and neither parameter is documented in the schema. The description clarifies that category_id is an ID lookup and introduces the milliunits convention, but the optional plan_id parameter is never mentioned, leaving a real gap in a 2-parameter tool.

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 a single category by ID'), which is clearer than the sibling list tools and distinguishes the single-item fetch. It does not, however, name the alternatives (categories_list, categories_get_for_month, category_groups_summary_by_month) to route the agent explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: nothing explains when to prefer this over categories_list, categories_get_for_month, or categories_list. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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