create_category

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the dry-run preview behavior, the confirmation mechanism via MCP elicitation or confirm=True, and the INVENTORY_W permission requirement. This provides a clear safety and authorization profile, with no contradiction to annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences plus a permission note, with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first meaningful clause, and subsequent sentences add behavioral context. Every word 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?

The description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required permission, and the dry-run/confirm flow. An output schema exists, so return values are not necessary to describe. It lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, but for a straightforward create operation, the context is sufficiently 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?

The input schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description compensates by explaining dry_run ('Previews on dry_run') and confirm ('confirms...before writing'). The name parameter is implicitly clear from 'Create a new inventory category.' While not exhaustive, it covers the essential semantics for all three parameters.

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 'Create a new inventory category,' which is a specific verb-object pair. This distinguishes it from sibling create tools like create_item or create_modifier. The initial phrase 'Modifies merchant data' is generic, but the core purpose is 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 provides clear context by specifying 'Requires INVENTORY_W' permission and explaining the dry-run/confirm workflow. It implies when to use the tool (to create a category) but does not explicitly compare it to alternatives like list_categories, which would have elevated it to a 5.

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