update_category

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It adds the key behavioral detail of partial updates, which is valuable. However, it omits information about side effects, return values, permissions, or error handling, which are typical for mutation tools.

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, front-loaded sentence that gets straight to the point. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 simple two-parameter schema and complete parameter documentation, the description is minimally adequate. However, without an output schema, it doesn't clarify what the tool returns (e.g., updated category object, success flag), which would be helpful. Overall, it's sufficient but not rich.

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 already documents both parameters with 100% coverage, including the 'data' object's common fields. The description's 'partial update' phrase adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema's 'Fields to change' already implies.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('category'), and the method ('by id' with 'partial update'). This distinguishes it from sibling update tools for other resources and from category creation/deletion tools.

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 implies usage context: updating an existing category by id, and clarifies the partial update behavior. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool names (e.g., create_category, delete_category) make the context clear enough.

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