list-categories

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It does disclose the return content (page/subcat/file counts), which is helpful, but says nothing about pagination behavior despite the limit and continue_from parameters, nor about permissions or read-only nature.

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 core action and return shape, then the filter hint. No filler, though the third sentence is soft utility framing rather than essential information.

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 four-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the filter, and the return shape, which is adequate. It omits pagination behavior and multi-wiki scoping semantics that the continue_from and wiki parameters imply.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters; baseline 3 applies. The description's prefix note largely restates the schema's own 'Filter categories by prefix' and adds nothing for wiki, limit, or continue_from.

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 all categories on the wiki') and discloses what is returned (page/subcat/file counts). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get-category-members by listing categories rather than their members, though it never names that alternative.

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?

The final sentence ('Useful for discovering how content is organized') implies a discovery use case, and the prefix note hints at narrowing. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no mention of the sibling get-category-members for drilling into a category.

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