Create Category Tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says 'Create' but discloses nothing about duplicate-name handling, required permissions, idempotency, or whether the call is reversible — real gaps for a mutation tool. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained here.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is efficient, though it sits close to the under-specification line rather than being genuinely informative.

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 one-parameter creation tool with an output schema, the basics are covered and return values need not be described. Still, as a mutation with zero annotation coverage, it omits duplicate handling, error behavior, and permissions, so it is only minimally complete.

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% and there is a single parameter, so the schema fully documents 'name'. The description adds no syntax, format, or uniqueness constraints beyond what the schema already states, which lands at the baseline 3.

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 gives a specific verb (Create) and resource (a new category), which is unambiguous about what the tool does. It does not, however, differentiate from adjacent siblings such as rename_category_tool or delete_category_tool, leaving the routing distinction to the tool names alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of the alternative category tools. An agent must infer from the name that this is the creation path versus list/rename/delete.

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