Bulk Update Action Plan Item Assignees

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

The description states it updates and returns the modified object, which is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=false). However, it does not disclose important behavioral details such as the meaning of the 'completion_mode' parameter (all_or_nothing vs atomic) or failure behavior. The annotations already cover basic safety, so the description adds minimal additional context.

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 relatively concise, with a few sentences covering purpose, required parameters, and API reference. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though it includes redundant labeling of the tool name.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks critical details. It does not specify the expected format of 'plan_item_assignees' array items, the behavior of 'completion_mode', or what the 'modified object' looks like. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats that project_id and plan_item_assignees are required, but does not explain the structure of plan_item_assignees or the significance of completion_mode. No additional meaning beyond the schema is provided.

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 verb (bulk update) and resource (action plan item assignees), and indicates that it modifies existing records. However, there is a slight ambiguity when it says 'update an existing Action Plans' while the tool name refers to assignees. It does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'bulk_update_action_plan_item'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply says 'Use this to update...' without any exclusions, context, or mentions of sibling tools.

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