Assign Agent to Task Role

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

Annotations declare write/non-idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds two genuinely useful traits beyond that: the [OPERATOR] tag signals an elevated authorization requirement, and 'Creates a delegation automatically' discloses a non-obvious side effect that a caller would otherwise not anticipate from the name.

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?

Two compact sentences with the authorization marker and the core action front-loaded. No filler, though the bracketed prefix is slightly cryptic without explanation.

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 6-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the auto-delegation side effect but omits what the tool returns, whether spend_limit caps are enforced, and the exact privilege implied by [OPERATOR]. Adequate but leaves real gaps an agent must infer.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters (task_id, role, agent_id, agent_public_key, scope, spend_limit) are documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or default detail beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('assign an agent to a role in a task') and adds the automatic-delegation side effect. It is distinguishable from siblings like create_delegation because it frames delegation as a consequence of role assignment rather than the primary action, though it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over create_delegation.

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 when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative guidance. The [OPERATOR] prefix hints at a privilege requirement but the description never states the condition that selects this tool versus create_delegation, create_v2_delegation, or accept_assignment.

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