get_nodes_by_category

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently indicates a read-only operation ('Get'), but does not disclose any behavioral details such as pagination, ordering, or potential limitations. For a simple retrieval tool this is adequate, but it adds no extra context beyond the operation itself.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and object, and includes practical examples. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it does. However, it does not specify the return format or any pagination behavior, which would have been helpful, but is not critical for basic usage.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the 'category' parameter with examples. The description repeats these examples but does not add any new semantics beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema description coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('nodes') with a clear scope ('by category'), and includes examples of valid categories. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_nodes (all nodes) and get_node (single node), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 description implies usage for retrieving nodes filtered by category, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_nodes or get_node, nor does it mention alternatives. The context is clear enough, but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references.

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