yapi-create-category

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. '新增' implies a write operation, but the description doesn't state permissions required, whether this is idempotent, what happens on duplicate names, or what the response looks like. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant 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, efficient phrase in Chinese ('新增 YAPI 接口分类') that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 this is a creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., the new category ID), error conditions, or behavioral nuances. The context signals indicate moderate complexity (3 parameters, 2 required), but the description lacks necessary details for safe and effective use.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (name, project_id, desc) with descriptions in Chinese. The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '新增 YAPI 接口分类' clearly states the action (新增/create) and resource (YAPI 接口分类/YAPI interface category) in Chinese. It's specific about what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'yapi-create-interface' which creates interfaces rather than categories.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a project ID), exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools like 'yapi-get-categories' for listing categories or 'yapi-create-interface' for creating interfaces within categories.

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