create_category_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes parameter behavior (exclude_fields default/override) but does not disclose creation behavior such as error handling, idempotency, or access requirements. The description is functional but not fully transparent.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with the purpose, then lists parameters in a clear Args block. Each sentence adds unique value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool has an output schema, so the description does not need to detail return values. However, it could mention what the response contains (e.g., the created category group). The parameter exclude_fields is explained in context of the response, which partially compensates. Overall, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must provide semantic meaning. It does so effectively: plan_id is linked to list_plans, name includes max length constraint, and exclude_fields has detailed usage (default, override, all fields). This adds significant value beyond the schema types.

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 'Create a new category group.' The verb 'create' and resource 'category group' are specific. The tool name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like update_category_group and create_category, as the resource differs.

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 guidance for the exclude_fields parameter (default behavior, how to override) and suggests using list_plans to find plan IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_category, update_category_group), nor does it mention any prerequisites or side effects.

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