mcp_assign_terms

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic action, omitting critical details such as default behavior (replace vs append), required prerequisites (terms exist), error handling, and side effects on existing term assignments.

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 sentence that directly conveys the purpose. It is concise without unnecessary words. However, it could include additional key information (e.g., effect of append) without becoming verbose, so it is not maximal.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations) and the operation's mutating nature, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the append/replace behavior, prerequisites, or return value. The schema provides parameter details, but the description itself should offer more complete context.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema states. For example, the append parameter is described in the schema as 'Append to existing terms (false = replace)', which is sufficient. No extra context is needed.

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 'Assign taxonomy terms to a post' clearly states the verb (assign) and the resources (taxonomy terms, post). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like mcp_create_term (creating terms) and mcp_list_terms (listing terms), as it deals with the assignment relationship.

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 vs alternatives like mcp_create_term or mcp_update_term. It does not mention that terms must already exist, nor does it indicate that the append parameter determines whether terms are added or replaced.

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