update_assignment

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

No annotations are available, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the fact it updates. It omits side effects, error conditions, or idempotency. The term 'update' implies mutation, but no warnings about destructive actions or rollback.

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 (one sentence plus a bullet list) and well-structured. Every sentence adds some value by explaining parameter constraints. It avoids verbosity, though the list could be more integrated.

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 (7 parameters, required fields) and presence of an output schema, the description covers basic parameter semantics but lacks broader context: e.g., typical use cases, relationship to other tools, or error handling. It is adequate but not complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning beyond the schema: e.g., 'assignment_id: ID of the assignment to update (must be >= 1)' provides validation constraints. For allocation, it specifies 'minutes per day'. For dates, it implies YYYY-MM-DD format. The description covers all 7 parameters with added context.

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 updates an existing Forecast assignment. Among siblings, create_assignment and delete_assignment exist, so the purpose is distinct. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from create_assignment (e.g., 'use this to modify an existing assignment, not to create a new one').

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 like create_assignment or delete_assignment. It does not specify prerequisites, such as needing the assignment to exist or user permissions.

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