get_subcat_multipleFetch direct subcategories for up to 20 Wikipedia categories at once, returning each row with its source category. Use it to map category hierarchies in bulk.
Direct subcategories for several categories (rows carry source_category).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lang | No | Wikipedia language code (default "en"). | en |
| catname_list | Yes | Category names (max 20). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It hints at output structure ('rows carry source_category') and that only direct children are returned, but says nothing about permissions, limits (the schema caps at 20), pagination, or return format for a tool with no output schema.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is terse rather than verbose, though the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than trimming waste.
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 multi-category lookup tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is thin: it does not describe the return shape beyond one field, nor limits or ordering. An agent cannot fully predict what it will receive.
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% — lang and catname_list are fully documented in the schema, including the max-20 constraint. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 (subcategories) with batch scope ('several categories'), and the parenthetical clarifies output shape. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_subcat_table or get_subcat_with_depth, leaving the agent to infer the difference.
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, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. The agent gets no help deciding between this, get_subcat_table, and get_subcat_with_depth.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.