get_category

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that soft-deleted categories can be retrieved, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., what happens if the category is permanently deleted or does not exist) or idempotency, leaving gaps in transparency.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core purpose and a key behavioral detail. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 get-by-id tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It captures the important soft-delete behavior. Minor gaps (e.g., error handling, behavior for nonexistent IDs) prevent a perfect score.

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% (both parameters have clear descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 action ('Get a category') and the resource ('category'), and adds a specific differentiator ('including a soft-deleted category'). This distinguishes it from listing or mutating categories, but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like 'list_categories' or 'restore_category'.

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 such as 'list_categories' (for multiple categories) or 'restore_category' (for undeleting). The agent is left to infer the appropriate context.

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