labels_assign_label_to_device

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

Without annotations, the description provides key behavioral information: that existing labels are preserved. This adds value beyond the schema, but could note potential constraints (e.g., label uniqueness).

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and key behavior, no wasted words.

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?

For a simple assignment tool, the description covers the essential behavioral nuance. Output schema existence is noted, but description doesn't mention return value, though not critical for agent invocation.

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 0%, and description does not detail parameters. However, param names ('device_id', 'label_id') and tool name make their purpose self-evident. Description could specify expected formats or constraints.

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 action (assign), resource (label to device), and adds a crucial behavior (preserves existing labels), distinguishing it from sibling tools like labels_remove_label_from_device.

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 implies usage for adding a label without removal, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling context helps, but no direct alternatives mentioned.

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