search_vertical_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool is 'free, no credits', which is helpful. However, it does not mention any potential limitations (e.g., result set size, pagination) or side effects, which is a gap for a search operation.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the core message ('Reference data'), with no unnecessary words. Every part serves the purpose.

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 simple 1-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides essential context (purpose, cost). However, since there is no output schema, mentioning the expected return format (e.g., list of categories) would improve completeness. Slight 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 description coverage is 100% with a clear param description: 'Keyword to search vertical categories'. The tool description adds 'to find valid vertical category filter values', but this only slightly extends the schema. No additional meaning is added beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'search for vertical category names by keyword to find valid vertical category filter values'. It uses a specific verb+resource ('search for vertical category names') and distinguishes from siblings like 'search_vertical_sub_categories' and 'get_news_categories' by emphasizing it's for top-level vertical categories.

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 description states this is 'reference data' used 'to find valid vertical category filter values', giving clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings, though the purpose is clear enough for appropriate selection.

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