aura_categories

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return cardinality (13 categories) and that counts are 'live', which is useful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about caching, rate limits, or how 'free counts' are scoped (per category vs. total).

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?

Two crisp sentences with zero waste. The result shape is front-loaded and the follow-up action is stated immediately.

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?

Adequate for a zero-param discovery tool, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description should say a bit more about what each category entry contains or what 'free counts' means. Minor gap, not a blocker.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-arg invocation, consistent with the empty 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 resource (the 13 component categories) and the data returned (live free counts). Differentiates reasonably from siblings like aura_search_components by framing it as the entry point for category browsing, though it doesn't name a sibling explicitly.

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 a clear workflow: 'Pick one, then search within it,' which implies this is a top-level browse tool preceding aura_search_components. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the sequencing guidance is actionable.

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