Assign a category to one or more library posts (Instagram or TikTok), or clear it with 'none'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | Yes | Category (id or name), or 'none' to clear | |
| post_ids | Yes | Post ids (UUID) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a mutating but idempotent operation. The description adds the behavioral detail that 'none' clears the category, which is valuable. However, it doesn't disclose details like whether assignment overwrites existing categories, whether 'none' is case-sensitive, or whether partial failures occur when multiple post_ids are provided. With annotations covering the mutation profile, a 3 is appropriate.
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?
Single sentence that is clear and front-loaded with the verb and object, followed by the essential 'none' clarification. No wasted words, no repetition of schema details. It earns its place.
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 idempotent assignment tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It covers the two key behaviors (assign and clear). A minor gap is not mentioning the relationship to category existence — whether 'category' must already exist or if it can be created on the fly — and whether the assignment replaces an existing category. But given the tool's simplicity and annotations, this is adequate.
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 both parameters are already documented in the schema: post_ids as an array of UUIDs (1-50 items) and category as a string or 'none'. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, just clarifying that 'none' clears the category and that posts are Instagram/TikTok posts. Baseline 3 is correct since the schema handles parameter semantics.
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 states the specific verb 'Assign' or 'clear', the resource (library posts of Instagram or TikTok), and the action scope (one or more). It explicitly mentions the 'none' value for clearing, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_account_category or update_folder. This is a precise, unambiguous statement of what the tool does.
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 clearly conveys the tool's purpose for assigning or clearing categories on posts, and the 'none' value explicitly covers the clearing use case. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, the purpose is specific enough that an agent can infer when to use it. It does not explicitly say when not to use it versus set_my_account_category or create_category, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
