browse_categoriesDiscover a store's category hierarchy and product counts. Use the returned category uid to list products in a department or subcategory.
Return the store's category tree (departments and their subcategories) with product counts. Use this to discover how the catalog is organized, then pass a category uid to get_category_products to list its items.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must establish the read/discovery profile itself. 'Return the store's category tree' makes clear this is a read operation, and 'with product counts' states what payload detail to expect. It does not disclose caveats, but for a zero-parameter catalog read none are strongly needed.
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?
Two sentences with no filler: the first states the return value, the second gives practical routing guidance. The description does not repeat the title or schema contents.
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 no-argument catalog browse tool with no output schema, the description tells the agent what it will receive (a tree of departments/subcategories with counts) and how to continue. The only minor omission is the exact response shape, which is not necessary for successful invocation.
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 tool exposes zero parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100%, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The mention of category uid refers to the downstream get_category_products tool, not to this call.
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?
Opening phrase 'Return the store's category tree...' pairs a specific verb with a concrete resource and scopes it to departments/subcategories and product counts. The closing reference to get_category_products helps distinguish this tree-discovery tool from the item-listing sibling.
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?
'Use this to discover how the catalog is organized' is an explicit invocation condition, and 'then pass a category uid to get_category_products' names the next-action alternative. This gives the agent a clear decision path without requiring schema inspection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.