Add Category To Project

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

Annotations provide no safety hints, but the description states it creates a record (write operation) and returns the UUID on success (HTTP 201). It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or error conditions, but the information is adequate.

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 somewhat verbose, repeating the HTTP status and mixing usage context. It front-loads the main action but could be more concise without losing critical details.

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 creation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return value and required params. However, it lacks details on error handling, authentication, or common pitfalls, leaving some 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description merely restates the required parameters (company_id, project_id, name) without adding new meaning or clarifying parameter values beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'Add' and the resource 'Category to a Project', and mentions subcategories. It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_subcategory_to_category', but the mention of 'Resource Planning records' slightly muddies the core purpose.

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 includes 'Use this to create a new Resource Planning records in Procore' which implies context, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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