list_assignments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the basic behavior (listing assignments with filters) but lacks details on side effects, pagination, rate limits, or data ordering.

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 short and to the point, with a clear docstring format listing parameters. It is not verbose, but could be slightly more efficient by removing redundant 'Required.' notes since schema already marks them required.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. However, it misses details about pagination, result limits, sorting, and behavior when no results or overlapping date ranges. This leaves gaps for a list tool.

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 0%, but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: start_date and end_date required with format YYYY-MM-DD, project_id and person_id optional filters. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'List scheduled assignments in Forecast within a date range,' specifying a verb and resource with scope. It distinguishes from siblings like 'all_projects_schedule' and 'list_project_assignments' by explicitly mentioning 'scheduled' and date range filtering.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no mentions of prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where other tools 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.