vtex_get_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), but doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves in practice.

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 extremely concise at just four words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get category details') followed by the key constraint ('by ID'). Every word serves a clear purpose, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'category details' includes, how errors are handled, or what authentication is required. For a tool that likely returns structured data about categories, more context about the response format and potential limitations would be helpful for effective agent use.

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 description mentions 'by ID' which aligns with the single 'categoryId' parameter in the schema. With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents this parameter adequately. The description adds marginal value by reinforcing the ID-based lookup but doesn't provide additional context about valid ID formats or examples beyond what the schema offers.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('category details by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'vtex_list_categories' by specifying retrieval of a single category rather than listing multiple. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other 'get' tools like 'vtex_get_product' or 'vtex_get_brand', which follow the same pattern.

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 sibling tools like 'vtex_list_categories' for browsing categories or 'vtex_create_category' for creating new ones. There's no context about prerequisites, error conditions, or typical use cases, leaving the agent with minimal usage direction.

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