Albert Heijn: Product Categories

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds real behavioral context by explaining the two-mode hierarchy traversal (top-level vs. children) that the annotation cannot convey. It does not mention ordering, depth limits, or whether the category tree is region/locale specific, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, each doing distinct work: identity, hierarchy behavior, and cross-tool handoff. The conditional behavior is front-loaded and no sentence is redundant.

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?

With one optional parameter, full schema coverage, a readOnly annotation, and an output schema handling return values, the description covers everything an agent needs to call this correctly. The added workflow pointer to ah_search_products closes the only remaining gap.

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 coverage is 100% and parent_id is already documented as "Category id whose subcategories to list," so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond that by stating the semantics of omitting the parameter entirely (returns top-level categories) and by linking the returned category id to the category_id argument of ah_search_products.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("List Albert Heijn's product categories") and immediately grounds it with concrete examples ("'Groente, aardappelen'" or "'Kaas'"). It also disambiguates from siblings like ah_search_products and ah_get_products, which return products rather than the category taxonomy.

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?

It gives clear operative context: call with no argument for top-level categories, or with parent_id for subcategories, and it names ah_search_products as the downstream tool for products within a category. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use rule (e.g. that this tool never returns products itself), but the intended usage path is unambiguous.

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