tvh_assign_services

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the risk profile is largely covered. The description contributes one genuinely useful behavioral fact — add mode preserves existing mappings — but says nothing about what replace/remove destroy or how dry_run changes behavior.

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?

A single tight sentence with the operation and the key scoping caveat front-loaded; nothing is wasted. It is short to a fault, but not padded or disorganized.

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?

This is a destructive, non-idempotent mutation on live channel configuration with an output schema available, and four parameters at 0% schema coverage. The description omits the dry_run escape hatch and the destructive effect of replace/remove, leaving an agent with an incomplete picture before a risky write.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It does clarify that add mode preserves other mappings, but it never explains dry_run, nor what service_uuids means in remove/replace mode (e.g., whether an empty list is valid), and simply echoes the enum values already in 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?

States a specific verb set (add/replace/remove) applied to a concrete resource ('a channel's service mappings'), so an agent knows exactly what is mutated. It doesn't contrast itself with the closely related sibling tvh_map_services, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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 modes imply when each behavior applies, and it notes that add mode preserves other mappings, which hints at the add-vs-replace choice. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of when to prefer tvh_map_services or a dry run first.

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