catalog_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 implies a read-only operation via the verb 'show' but does not clarify what format the tools/descriptions come back in, whether an invalid category yields an error, or any other behavioral traits. The description adds little beyond what a reasonable agent would guess.

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 zero wasted words. For a one-parameter tool, this length is appropriate and every word earns its place.

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 single-enum-parameter informational tool, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no output schema present, the description does not explain what the returned 'tools and description' output looks like, and the concept of a category (and how it maps to the three enum values) is left unexplained.

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% - the category_id parameter is fully described with an enum ('catalog, search, or discovery') and an explicit description. The tool description's phrase 'specific category' aligns with the parameter but adds no semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('tools and description for a specific category'). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'catalog_overview', whose scope (overview of all categories vs. one specific category) is left entirely to inference.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus catalog_overview (the natural sibling alternative), nor any context about the search/discovery/catalog categories or their relationship. There are no explicit when/when-not statements or alternative names mentioned.

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