retrieve_assignment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds little behavioral context – no note on what happens when the assignment does not exist or on scope/permissions – though it does not contradict anything.

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?

It is short and front-loaded with the endpoint template, which is useful. However, the second sentence largely restates the first ('Get specific assignment' / 'Get attributes for a specific tag assignment'), so it wastes space on redundancy rather than adding information.

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 read-only single-resource fetch with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate. It leaves the return shape and the not-found behavior unspecified, which an agent would have to discover at call time, but nothing critical to invoking it is missing.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the resourceType enumeration values. The description only restates that resourceType and resourceId are needed, adding no format or semantic detail beyond the 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 states a specific verb and resource: getting attributes for one tag assignment, with the REST path template making it explicit that this is a single-item fetch rather than a list. It could have named retrieve_assignment_list as the alternative, but the singular/plural and path template make the distinction inferable.

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?

It notes the prerequisites ('resource type and resource id is required'), which is implied usage context, but there is no explicit guidance about when to use this versus retrieve_assignment_list or the audit endpoints. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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