category_metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description mainly adds content details (list of metric groups) rather than behavioral traits. It does not disclose pagination, performance, or rate limits, which is acceptable given the annotation coverage.

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 concise: two front-loaded sentences cover purpose and supported queries, followed by a bullet list of metric groups. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the metric groups (demand, competition, Amazon presence, etc.) and providing example use cases. It covers what the tool returns but could be slightly more precise about the return format.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema; it lists the returned metrics but not parameter-specific details like mutual exclusivity of category_id and category_name.

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 verb 'Return' and the resource 'full metric set for ONE category', differentiating from sibling tools by specifying single-category scope and any depth, including a concrete example like 'Terrariums'.

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('show me the metrics/stats for category X', 'how big is the X category') that guide the agent on when to invoke this tool, but does not mention when not to use it or directly compare to alternatives.

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