ynab_update_category

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) are consistent with the tool's nature. The description adds context: dry_run preview behavior, error handling, and the milliunits conversion. No contradictions.

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 well-organized into Args, Returns, Examples, Errors sections. It is concise, with every sentence adding value. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 4 parameters (2 required) and 0% schema coverage, the description compensates well. An output schema exists (not shown) but description summarizes returns. Slight gap: no mention of date scope beyond 'current month', or behavior with zero budgeted.

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?

While schema description coverage is 0%, the description explains all 4 parameters: budget_id (optional), category_id (required), budgeted (milliunits conversion), and dry_run (Boolean). The milliunits example (budgeted=100000) adds critical meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states 'Update the budgeted amount for a category in the current month.' This is a specific verb and resource, distinctly different from sibling tools like ynab_get_category (read) or ynab_update_transaction (different resource).

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 practical guidance: explains the dry_run option for preview, includes an error resolution hint ('run ynab_set_default_budget first'), and gives examples. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools for when to use this vs alternatives.

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