ftrack_assume_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the admin privilege requirement but omits critical behavioral details: whether the identity assumption persists for subsequent calls, whether it must be reverted with ftrack_un_assume_user, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a state-changing tool.

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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the parenthetical adds a crucial constraint. No wasted words.

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 tool is simple, but as a state-changing operation, the description lacks essential context about the scope and duration of the identity assumption. With no output schema and no annotations, more instruction is needed for safe use.

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 user_id described as 'User ID to assume'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Assume another user identity') with a specific resource (user identity) and a key prerequisite (admin privileges). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ftrack_un_assume_user and other user management tools.

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?

Implied use case is clear for impersonation, and 'requires admin privileges' signals a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like ftrack_un_assume_user or provide exclusions.

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