Categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior beyond them: roughly 60 top-level entries, and the important semantic note that a parent id already subsumes its sub-categories when used as a filter. It does not discuss pagination or ordering, so it stops short of 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, front-loaded with the purpose and the id linkage, then the default behavior, then the two optional modes. Every clause carries operational information; nothing is repeated from the schema verbatim.

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 read-only two-parameter lookup with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers how to call it, what the default returns, and the key return field (category ids). Minor gaps remain around ordering and whether the full ~60-item top-level list is ever truncated.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the no-argument default behavior, that `query` matches both categories and sub-categories (not just top-level), and what `parent` expansion actually yields. Only the Persian-string hint is left entirely to 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List Darukade's product categories") and immediately ties the output to a concrete use: the ids that dr_search and dr_cheapest accept as `category`. That distinguishes it from dr_brands, dr_forms, and the other lookup siblings without needing the 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?

Gives explicit mode selection: no arguments for top-level categories, `query` for name search across categories and sub-categories, `parent` to expand one top-level category. It also names the downstream tools that consume the returned ids, which is precisely the alternative-selection guidance an agent needs.

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