List Recycled Action Plan Item Assignees

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that the response is paginated with metadata and requires project_id. This adds moderate context but does not disclose rate limits, authentication, or edge cases (e.g., empty results).

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 front-loaded with the purpose and includes useful endpoint details, but it is slightly verbose and includes contradictory statements. Could be more concise and accurate.

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?

No output schema is present. The description mentions a paginated JSON array with metadata but does not describe the fields in each item. The confusion between Action Plans and Action Plan Item Assignees makes the description incomplete for an agent to understand the exact data returned.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions required project_id and pagination parameters (page, per_page) but does not add meaning to the filter parameters already defined in the schema. No additional semantic value.

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 starts by stating 'List of all Recycled Action Plan Item Assignees' which clearly identifies the resource. However, it then says 'Use this to enumerate Action Plans' and 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Action Plans', which contradicts the tool name and initial purpose, causing confusion.

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 mentions pagination and filtering but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. other list tools (e.g., list_action_plan_item_assignees for active items). It does not provide when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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