category_assign

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

Annotations are absent, so the description bears full responsibility. It includes a [WRITE][risk=medium] tag, indicating a write operation with medium risk. However, it lacks details on idempotency, error handling, or consequences of missing entities, which would enhance transparency.

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, with a clear purpose line, risk indicator, and structured Args section. It is front-loaded and efficient, though a brief note on the return value could improve completeness without adding clutter.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the tool's action, parameters, and risk level adequately. It is missing only a mention of expected response or success/failure indicators, which would make it fully complete.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully explains all three parameters: category_ext_id (from category_list), vm_ext_ids (from vm_list), and target (optional, omit for default). It provides context beyond the schema names, meeting the need for clarity.

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's purpose: 'Bulk-associate a category to a set of VMs.' It uses a specific verb (bulk-associate) and identifies the resources (category and VMs), distinguishing it from sibling tools like category_list or category_create.

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 mentions that category_ext_id comes from category_list and vm_ext_ids from vm_list, implying context but not explicitly stating when to use this tool versus alternatives like category_create or direct VM updates. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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