List Godly categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing what comes back (names plus item counts) for a tool with no output schema, though it omits ordering, whether counts are all-time or scoped, and any result-size limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that conveys purpose, payload shape, and downstream use with no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what it returns and why an agent would call it. Nothing further is needed to invoke it correctly.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline applies. The description usefully reframes the output as the input vocabulary for search_inspiration's `category` parameter, which is the only semantic connection worth making here.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List category names') with the added detail that item counts are included, and it explicitly ties the result to the `category` filter of the sibling search_inspiration. An agent can distinguish this from search_inspiration or get_inspiration without opening any schema.

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 phrase 'usable as the `category` filter in search_inspiration' clearly signals the intended workflow (fetch categories, then filter searches), naming the sibling that consumes the output. It stops short of an explicit 'call this before search_inspiration when you don't know valid category values' or stating when-not to use it, so it's clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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