create_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden and does well by explaining the dry_run preview behavior, default budget selection, and the constraint that target_frequency cannot be combined with target_date. It does not mention error conditions or side effects beyond creation, but the key behaviors are covered.

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 compact and well-structured, with each parameter on its own line and no redundant prose. It conveys all necessary operational details without wasting words.

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 moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main operational aspects, including defaults and a validation mode. It does not describe the success return value or potential errors, but the dry_run explanation and parameter constraints make it sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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 description adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema by specifying units for target_amount, date format for target_date, allowed values for target_frequency, the mutual exclusivity with target_date, and the default behavior for budget_id and dry_run. All nine parameters are explained despite the schema having no property descriptions.

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 the tool creates a category in a YNAB category group, with the verb 'create' and a specific resource. It distinguishes itself from related category tools by focusing on the creation action, making its purpose 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?

The description explains how to use the tool, including defaults and the dry_run option, but it does not explicitly say when to use it instead of sibling tools like update_category or update_category_budget. The creation context is implied rather than stated as a direct alternative.

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