List categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description reaffirms read-only with the extra detail that no key is required. It also discloses a sorting behavior ('largest first') and the exact fields returned, which annotations do not cover.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: purpose and ordering first, then the cross-tool usage pattern, then the no-params/read-only constraint. Every sentence adds information an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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?

With no output schema, the description still enumerates the returned fields (slug, name, recipe count, url) and the sort order, and it pre-answers the obvious follow-up question of how to use the result. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly and explicitly notes it takes no parameters. It additionally explains the semantics of the key returned value (slug) and how to reuse it in another tool.

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 ('List all recipe categories') plus an ordering guarantee ('largest first'). It also names the sibling tool it complements (search_recipes), so an agent can distinguish it from a keyword search without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use the returned slug as the category filter in search_recipes to browse a topic rather than searching by keywords, and includes concrete example slugs. This is a clear when-to-use-this-instead-of-that instruction.

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