apm_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Beyond the word "List" (implying a read) and "currently available" (implying live, non-cached data), it says nothing about permissions, pagination, result size, or refresh behavior. For a zero-annotation tool this leaves meaningful gaps.

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 or redundancy. It is appropriately sized, though the brevity contributes to the gaps noted elsewhere.

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 no-argument discovery tool this is minimally adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations the description could reasonably state what a "category" or "verified supplier" record contains and how results are shaped. Those details are absent.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 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 pairs a specific verb ("List") with specific resources ("categories and verified suppliers") scoped to Agent Procurement Manager. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not contrast itself with the siblings apm_quote or apm_preview, so an agent must infer that this is the discovery/browse step of that trio.

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 explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no mention of the alternatives apm_quote and apm_preview. An agent can only guess that this is the browsing entry point before quoting.

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