get_category

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves 'detailed information' and 'current month data,' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detailed information' entails (e.g., fields returned, format). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior, warranting a low score.

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, efficient sentence: 'Get detailed information about a specific category including current month data.' It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating scope (e.g., 'Retrieves detailed category data, such as budget amounts and transactions, for the current month'), but it's still highly concise, earning a 4.

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 context: no annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema with full coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., fields like name, budgeted amount, activity), how 'current month data' is defined or formatted, or the return structure. For a tool that likely returns complex data (implied by 'detailed'), more context is needed to guide the agent effectively, resulting in a low score.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for 'budget_id' and 'category_id.' The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying that these IDs are used to fetch category details and current month data. Since the schema already fully describes the parameters, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't enhance or contradict the schema information.

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: 'Get detailed information about a specific category including current month data.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('category'), and scope ('detailed information... including current month data'), which distinguishes it from the sibling 'list_categories' tool that presumably lists multiple categories without detailed data. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_budget' or 'get_month' in terms of resource hierarchy, keeping it at a 4 rather than a perfect 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a budget_id and category_id), compare it to 'list_categories' for overviews versus detailed views, or specify use cases like retrieving current month data for analysis. With no explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives, it scores a 2 for minimal guidance.

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