zeroheight-list-categories

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, the description does not explicitly state safety, whether authentication is required, pagination behavior, or the return format. It adds minimal context beyond the name.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no filler or redundant phrases, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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, parameterless list operation, the description is mostly complete. It identifies the source (Zeroheight documentation) and the object (component categories). However, it does not clarify what a 'category' entails or what the response structure looks like, though with no output schema this is less critical.

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 has zero parameters, making parameter semantics trivial. With a schema coverage of 100% (empty schema) and a baseline of 4 for 0-param tools, the description correctly avoids inventing parameter details, and no additional semantic explanation is needed.

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 'List all component categories from Zeroheight design system documentation' clearly states the action (list), the resource (component categories), the scope (all), and the source (Zeroheight design system documentation). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-components, which likely list components instead of categories.

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 alternatives. Unlike the high-calibration example that explicitly names an alternative for filtered searches, this description gives no contextual pointers, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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