skool_community_labels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and endpoint domain; it does not mention authentication needs, response format, error behavior, rate limits, or whether any side effects exist. The 'Get' verb implies read-only behavior, but that is not made explicit.

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 states the core operation clearly. The phrase 'from api2.skool.com' adds endpoint context but is not essential; still, it does not meaningfully hurt 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?

For a one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the definition is minimally viable: it says what the tool returns and where the parameter comes from. However, without an output schema or annotations, the description could usefully state the shape of the returned labels or any access restrictions, which are currently left to inference.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the groupId parameter is already described as 'The group UUID (find via skool_community_info)'. The tool description adds no new parameter detail, but the schema sufficiently handles semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('category labels'), scoped to a community, which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like skool_community_info, skool_members_list, and skool_posts_list. An agent can tell what this tool does without needing to inspect the schema.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The schema param note 'find via skool_community_info' helps locate the groupId, but it does not explain conditions, prerequisites, or situations where a different sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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