Add Role To Project

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of creating records and returning HTTP 201 aligns but adds limited new behavioral context. There is no contradiction. The description does reveal the response format (UUID) and success status, which is useful but not extensive.

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 reasonably concise (five sentences) but contains some redundancy: 'Creates a new Resource Planning records' is mentioned twice. It is front-loaded with the main action, which is good. Minor trimming would improve clarity.

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?

The description explains the return value (new Role UUID) and the HTTP status on success. It also provides the API endpoint and resource path. Given no output schema and a relatively simple create operation, the description is sufficiently complete for the tool's purpose.

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 100% with already descriptive parameter descriptions. The description only restates the required parameters without adding deeper semantics (e.g., format, constraints, or behavior). According to the guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a Person to a Role in a Project.' It specifies the verb (Assign), the resource (Person/Role in Project), and mentions the return value (new Role UUID). This is specific and distinct from siblings like 'remove_role_from_project'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists required parameters but does not discuss prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools (e.g., when to use 'add_category_to_project' instead).

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