gitee_create_pull_label

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

The description lacks details beyond 'Add labels'. With no annotations provided, the agent has no information on whether the operation is additive or replaces existing labels, what happens on error (e.g., non-existent label), or any permission or rate limit requirements. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence with no redundant information. It front-loads the essential action and resource, making efficient use of tokens.

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 absence of annotations, output schema, and the tool's complexity (4 required parameters, no nested objects), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error handling, or behavioral nuances like whether labels are appended or replaced, leaving the agent with significant gaps.

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 provides clear descriptions for all four parameters, including that 'labels' is a JSON array of label names. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema, so a baseline score 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 'Add labels to a pull request' clearly states the verb (add) and resource (labels to a pull request). It is specific enough to distinguish from tools like gitee_create_label or gitee_add_issue_labels, though it does not explicitly clarify that it adds existing labels rather than creating new ones.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gitee_replace_pull_labels, gitee_delete_pull_label, or gitee_add_issue_labels. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the pull request must exist, labels must already be defined) or typical use cases.

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