qui_edit_category

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose that this is a mutating operation for editing category settings. It only mentions it's a PUT request, omitting effects, prerequisites, or safety considerations.

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 extremely short, which is efficient, but it is under-specified. It lacks any semantic content about categories, making it less useful despite its brevity.

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 tool has a skeletal schema and no annotations, so the description must carry the entire burden. It fails to communicate the domain purpose, the specific parameters, or the response, making it nearly impossible for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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 schema is generic with no parameter details. The description does provide a convention for passing path variables, query values, and body, but it does not enumerate the actual path/query/body fields needed (e.g., instanceID, category ID, category fields). This leaves the agent without concrete parameter knowledge.

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 identifies the exact endpoint and HTTP method (PUT /instances/{instanceID}/categories), but fails to state the functional purpose of the call (e.g., 'update a category'). It relies on the tool name for meaning, which is insufficient for distinguishing from create/remove sibling tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus qui_create_category or qui_remove_categories. The description simply instructs how to call an endpoint without indicating the intended scenario.

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