taxonomy_upsert_term

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic 'add or update'. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to mention whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on conflicts, or any side effects like data mutations.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single phrase. While it avoids fluff, it is too minimal to be useful. It could include more information without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

The description is highly incomplete given the tool's complexity: 6 parameters, 0% schema descriptions, and no behavioral context. An output schema exists but is not referenced. The tool needs far more detail for effective use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the parameters. However, it only mentions 'rules' without any detail on kind, family, pattern, priority, enabled, or notes. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 '添加或更新词表规则' (add or update vocabulary rules) clearly indicates the tool's purpose as a create/update operation on taxonomy terms. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not differentiate from siblings like taxonomy_list_terms.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as taxonomy_list_terms or other tools. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about appropriate use cases.

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