hcm_create_worker_assignment

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

The annotation only indicates readOnlyHint: false. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that the operation requires approval unless the --write flag is used, and that it creates a nested resource. This goes beyond the minimal annotation and helps the agent understand the mutation's approval flow.

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 a single sentence with the key action front-loaded. It is efficient, but the ellipsis in 'workRelationships/.../assignments' introduces ambiguity and reduces clarity. Overall, it is appropriately concise.

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 tool has three parameters (including a complex body object), no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description is far from complete. It omits the body schema, workerId semantics, and response expectations. The approval nuance is helpful but does not fill the gaps.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (workerId, body, periodOfServiceId). It hints at periodOfServiceId via the path 'workRelationships/.../assignments' but provides no details on body structure or required fields. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 ('Create nested worker assignment') and the resource location ('under workRelationships/.../assignments'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hcm_get_worker_assignments (read) and hcm_update_worker_assignment (update). It is specific and not a tautology, though it could be more explicit about the resource semantics.

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 includes an approval condition ('approval unless --write') but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where a different tool (e.g., update) would be appropriate. No explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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