list-category-objects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It describes a read operation but provides no details about pagination, ordering, error handling, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it is under-specified for a list operation; a bit more detail could be added without losing 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?

Given the simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not describe the output format, any default behavior, or what 'objects' refers to. A list operation typically needs to mention ordering, pagination, or scope.

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% for the single parameter (categoryId). The description adds 'specific category' context, but the schema already says 'Category ID'. Little additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('List all objects') and the resource ('for a specific category'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list-categories' (which lists categories) and 'list-charts' (which lists charts) by specifying 'objects' and requiring a categoryId.

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 implies usage when one needs objects for a specific category, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., list-categories or list-charts). No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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