wisdom_create_tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply states that a tag is created, with no mention of duplicate handling, uniqueness enforcement, persistence, side effects, required permissions, or response behavior. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a notable gap.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. It is concise without sacrificing clarity.

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 create tool, the schema fully documents the parameters and the enum constrains category values. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the tool returns on success or how it handles duplicate names. Given the low complexity, this is minimally complete but leaves some practical invocation details unstated.

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%, and the schema already documents name, category, and description, including the uniqueness note and the category enum. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. Per the baseline rule, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'Create a new tag for categorizing fragments.' It identifies the tool as creating a tag entity, which is distinct from related operations like wisdom_tag_fragment. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from any sibling tool, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wisdom_tag_fragment, wisdom_suggest_tags, or wisdom_list_tags. An agent must infer from the tool name that this creates a tag namespace rather than attaching an existing tag to a fragment. The description provides no exclusions or decision criteria.

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