Create category

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true), and the description adds real context beyond them: admin authorization requirement, that no color parameter exists because 'Skool picks its color', that members see the category immediately, and that no one is notified so confirmation isn't needed. Remaining gaps are edge cases like duplicate names or failed validation on the 30-character cap.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the permission gate, and every sentence is short. The main inefficiency is 'Admins only' stated twice in four sentences, which is redundant wording rather than harmful ambiguity.

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 4-parameter creation tool with annotations but no output schema, the description covers permissions, side effects, notification behavior, and the key enum semantic. It never states what the call returns (e.g., the new category's identifier or slug), which is a minor gap given there is no output schema to lean on.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining the who_can_post value 'admins' as an announcements-style category only admins post in, and by clarifying that color is not settable. The sort parameter is not elaborated beyond the schema, which is the one omission.

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?

Opens with a specific verb + resource and scope: 'Add a category to a group's feed.' The 'as Settings, Categories, Add does' anchor makes it unambiguous that this creates a new category, distinct from update_category/delete_category/list_categories. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the verb makes the distinction obvious.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: creating a brand-new category, admin-only. There is no explicit routing advice such as 'to rename or reorder an existing category use update_category' or a statement about what happens when the name already exists. The 'runs without asking first' line addresses confirmation behavior rather than tool selection.

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