list_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read operation, but the description doesn't mention pagination behavior (implied by 'cursor' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or what format the results will be in. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with parameters.

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, efficient phrase with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing tool and front-loads the essential information without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations, 50% schema coverage, no output schema, and two parameters (one undocumented), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like pagination or result format, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic purpose.

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 50% (only 'limit' has a description), and the description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. The baseline is 3 because the schema covers half the parameters adequately, but the description doesn't compensate for the undocumented 'cursor' parameter or add any semantic context.

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 item categories' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('item categories'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_items' or 'list_locations' beyond the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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. With siblings like 'list_items' and 'list_locations' available, there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions for selecting this specific listing tool.

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