get_polyhaven_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only restates the basic function of fetching categories and does not disclose behavioral traits like network dependence, return format, pagination, or error handling.

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 concise and front-loaded: one sentence for purpose and a brief parameter list. No filler or redundant content since the schema lacks descriptions.

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?

The tool is simple, but with no annotations or output schema, the description could mention the response format or note that it involves a network call. It is minimally adequate, but lacks some context that would help an agent anticipate failure modes or return data.

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 0% (the schema only has the property name 'Asset Type'), so the description must compensate. It lists the parameter (asset_type) and enumerates its valid values ('hdris, textures, models, all'), which adds essential meaning 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 gets a list of categories for a specific asset type on Polyhaven, using a specific verb 'get' and a clear resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_polyhaven_assets or download_polyhaven_asset.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_polyhaven_assets or get_polyhaven_status. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical workflows, or exclusions.

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