apply-category

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

Annotations indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive. The description adds that the action defaults to 'set', but lacks details on concurrency, idempotency, or error handling for batch operations.

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 single sentence is efficient and communicates the core purpose without fluff. However, it could include additional context like batch support without harming 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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description should disclose return values or side effects. It omits what the agent should expect after the operation, leaving the tool's behavior incomplete for invocation.

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 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It does not explain parameter relationships (e.g., mutual exclusivity of messageId and messageIds) or format requirements for categories.

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 verb ('apply, add, or remove') and the resource ('categories on email message(s)'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'manage-category' which likely handles category definitions.

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 by listing available actions but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., 'manage-category') or when to choose between 'set', 'add', and 'remove' actions.

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