Update a category

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it warns that slug changes break links with no redirect, states that content changes on the customer's site but nothing becomes public until publishing, and requires a secret key with taxonomy:write scope. These disclosures go beyond the simple annotation flags and inform the agent of important side effects and prerequisites.

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 four sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose and then packs critical warnings into compact, meaningful statements. Every sentence 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers essential context: the tool updates categories, has link-breaking consequences, does not publish, and requires auth credentials. Combined with the annotations and schema, it provides a complete picture for an agent to select and execute the tool correctly.

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 covers id and if_match with descriptions but leaves name and slug undocumented (50% coverage). The description explains that renaming is safe and that changing slug affects the URL, providing meaning for otherwise opaque fields. While it doesn't discuss if_match, the schema already covers that, so the description compensates for the coverage gap.

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 'Update a category' and elaborates on specific category behaviors like renaming and slug changes affecting the archive URL, distinguishing it from sibling update tools for other resources. The verb and resource are explicit and 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 contextual guidance by warning about slug changes and broken links, and noting that publishing is a separate call. It does not explicitly list alternatives, but the context clearly indicates when to use this tool versus other category operations like create or delete.

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