upservice_assign_tag

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool returns a JSON confirmation string, and lists the attribute types. It does not detail potential side effects or prerequisites, but overall provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 a single, well-structured paragraph with action, entity types, args, and returns. Every sentence is useful, and there is no redundant or extraneous information.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 required nested params, straightforward assignment action), the description covers the main purpose, allowed entities, and return format. It does not address error conditions or entity existence prerequisites, but is largely complete for typical 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?

The description reiterates the three parameters (tag_id, entity_id, entity_type) with types, which adds slight value since the input schema already contains descriptions. With schema description coverage at 0% (likely a misreading), the description compensates only modestly, so a baseline of 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 'Assign (attach) a tag to an entity' and lists specific entity types (task, chat, asset, contact, attachment), distinguishing it from sibling tools like upservice_create_tag, upservice_delete_tag, and upservice_unassign_tag.

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 implies usage for attaching tags to the listed entities, but does not explicitly mention when to avoid using it or point to alternatives (e.g., upservice_unassign_tag for removal). However, the verb 'assign' and the sibling names provide clear context, so it's adequate but not explicit.

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