Categories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's remaining behavioral value is the caveat that sub-categories are 'for reference' only, which is genuinely useful but thin; it says nothing about return shape or ordering.

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?

Purpose leads in the first sentence, with the downstream-use tip immediately after; no filler. The final sentence about with_counts is slightly tacked on and duplicates the schema's own description of that flag.

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?

A read-only enumeration tool with full schema coverage and no output schema; the description covers both modes and the downstream purpose. It would be stronger if it noted that each entry returns a slug and display name, since obtaining the slug value is the stated goal.

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 both parameters are documented there, including the '14 searches' cost note for with_counts, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the semantic intent (top-level vs sub-category listing) but adds no detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource (list top-level project categories) plus the alternate mode (sub-categories of one), and explicitly names the sibling tools it feeds (pn_search_projects, pn_search_freelancers). An agent can tell this is the taxonomy-lookup tool rather than a search tool.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use to get the `category` value for pn_search_projects and pn_search_freelancers', and clarifies that only top-level slugs are valid for those calls. No explicit when-not-to-use statement, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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