Detsky Mir Category Listing

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context: it's a real JSON endpoint with proper pagination and an upstream total, supports price inquiry without scraping, and documents the error format (ToolError with JSON message, error code, and retryability). No contradictions.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. The secondary reliability context and error format are in clearly separated short paragraphs. Every sentence earns its place with no 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?

For a read-only listing tool with an output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose, reliability, pagination, and error behavior. It could mention how the region parameter affects price/stock behavior, but the schema and output schema already carry most of that burden.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces pagination and total-count behavior but doesn't add field-level meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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 first line states a specific verb, resource, and output: 'List products in a Detsky Mir category, with the total match count.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling detmir_categories (which lists categories) and detmir_card (which fetches a product card), and the 'unlike text search' line separates it from search tools.

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?

Explicitly contrasts this tool with text search and frames it as 'the reliable way to enumerate the catalog,' with proper pagination and an upstream total. It doesn't name alternative sibling tools like detmir_categories or detmir_card, but the purpose statement and title make the distinction clear enough.

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