gitee_add_issue_labels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is solely responsible for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Add labels to an issue,' implying a mutation operation, but does not mention whether the operation is appending or setting, what happens to existing labels, required permissions, or side effects.

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 sentence that efficiently states the purpose. It is concise without being overly terse, but it could include more context without sacrificing brevity.

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 tool's simplicity, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention the return value, error conditions, or whether labels are added cumulatively. For a mutation tool with no output schema, more context is needed for effective use.

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 coverage is 100% (all four parameters have descriptions). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already explains the parameters, and the description does not compensate with extra context.

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 'Add labels to an issue' clearly states the verb and resource. It is specific enough to distinguish from gitee_create_label (which creates a new label definition) and gitee_replace_issue_labels (which replaces all labels). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like gitee_delete_issue_label.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gitee_replace_issue_labels (to replace all labels) or gitee_delete_issue_label (to remove a single label). It does not specify if labels are appended or overwritten, leaving the agent to infer behavior.

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