wealthbox.categories.list

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic read operation ('List') and provides no information about return format, pagination, rate limits, or other behavioral traits, making it minimally transparent.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains no fluff or redundancy, earning a high score for efficiency.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, no output schema, and the generic nature of the tool, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify what 'members' means, what the response structure looks like, or how different category types might behave, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 description does not explain the 'type' parameter at all, and schema description coverage is 0%. The schema's enum values are self-explanatory, but the description fails to add any contextual meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 'List members of a customizable category' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (members of a category). It is specific enough to convey the tool's function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling list tools like tags.list or customFields.list which might serve similar purposes for specific 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on how to choose between this and similar list operations.

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