mediawiki_manage_categories

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

Description discloses the key behavioral trait that categories are added/removed without full content editing. It preview option and return information (added, removed, already present, not found, revision ID, diff URL, undo instructions). Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true and openWorldHint: true, and the description aligns with and enriches them.

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?

Description is well-structured with sections for purpose, usage, parameters, and returns. Every sentence is informative and earned. No redundant or vague statements. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 complexity (6 parameters, 2 required, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, when to use it, how parameters work (including practical tips), and what is returned. No gaps. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values in detail, but the description still provides useful highlights.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds practical guidance beyond schema: clarifies that add/remove arrays should omit 'Category:' prefix. This helps avoid common errors. It also lists each parameter with its role, though schema descriptions already cover most. The added value raises it to 4.

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's purpose: 'Add or remove categories from a page without editing the full content.' It specifies the verb 'add/remove' and the resource 'categories from a page'. It distinguishes from siblings by noting NOT FOR listing categories or viewing category members, referencing mediawiki_list_categories and mediawiki_get_category_members.

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?

Explicit 'USE WHEN' section provides clear triggers: user says 'add category X', 'remove from category Y', 'categorize this page'. The 'NOT FOR' section lists exclusions and alternatives, giving the agent clear disambiguation.

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