semrush_backlinks_categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context ('based on backlinks') but does not explain what the categories represent, how results are aggregated, or any limitations. With annotations present, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, which is concise but insufficiently informative for a tool with three parameters and zero schema descriptions. Important details are omitted, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 tool has three parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to provide adequate context. It does not explain the return format, how categories are derived, or how parameters like 'limit' and 'target_type' affect the output. The presence of many sibling tools further necessitates more context, which 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description offers no explanation of the three parameters (target, target_type, limit). The description does not clarify the role of 'target_type' (enum: root_domain, domain, url) or how 'limit' affects the results. The lack of parameter documentation forces the agent to infer meaning from names alone.

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 ('Get'), resource ('domain categories'), and scope ('for a target based on backlinks'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like semrush_backlinks (generic backlinks data) and semrush_backlinks_anchors (anchor-specific data).

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 explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool. The context is implied (obtain domain categories from backlinks), but alternatives are not mentioned. The description provides no exclusionary criteria.

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