Simpler.Asia

team_assignment_update

Edits an assignment's content (title/description/priority/due_at/attachment) — only the assigner may call this, and only before the job reaches a terminal state. assigned_to cannot move here even though it is a writable column: reassigning is a separate transition that also opens a 30-second undo window. NEXT: team_assignment_reassign to hand the job to someone else.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "team_assignment_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The team_assignment id (team_assignment_list shows them).
`title`	No
`due_at`	No
`status`	No
`priority`	No
`started_at`	No
`accepted_at`	No
`artifact_id`	No
`assigned_to`	No
`declined_at`	No
`description`	No
`photos_json`	No
`completed_at`	No
`reassigned_at`	No
`reassigned_by`	No
`attachment_key`	No
`decline_reason`	No
`attachment_name`	No
`attachment_type`	No
`previous_status`	No
`completion_notes`	No
`previous_assignee`	No
`expected_updated_at`	No	Optional compare-and-set guard: the updated_at from a prior read. Mismatch returns CONFLICT — another writer changed this assignment first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the permission model, the terminal-state constraint, and the unusual rule that assigned_to is a writable column but cannot be changed through this tool. It also explains that reassignment has its own 30-second undo window, which is useful operational context not present in annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences with the scope constraint front-loaded and a useful NEXT routing cue. No wasted language, and the most important restrictions come before the sibling pointer.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is strong on permissions, state gating, and routing, but it is incomplete for a mutation exposing 23 fields. It does not resolve why status and workflow timestamp fields are in the schema if this tool is only for content edits, which could lead an agent to pass unsupported or unintended fields.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 9% across 23 parameters, so the description must carry the burden. It names title, description, priority, due_at, and attachment, and excludes assigned_to, but leaves status, timestamps, previous_status, decline_reason, completion_notes, and the attachment subfields unexplained or ambiguous about whether they are accepted here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific edit action on a specific resource and names the exact content fields it touches. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling team_assignment_reassign by explaining that reassignment is a separate transition, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly gives the caller restriction (only the assigner), the state precondition (only before a terminal state), and the alternative for a different intent (NEXT: team_assignment_reassign). This is a complete when/when-not/alternative map.

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

All Simpler.Asia tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?