assign_to_executor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Assign a sequence to an executor' but does not specify whether this overwrites existing assignments, requires the executor to be free, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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 concise: a one-line summary, followed by structured Args/Returns/Example sections. Every component earns its place. The example is helpful. There is no extraneous text, and the structure makes information easy to parse.

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 simple tool with two integer parameters and an output schema (return string), the description is adequate in providing an overview and example. However, it lacks context about preconditions, side effects, and how this tool fits among siblings. Given the number of sibling tools related to executors and sequences, more context would improve completeness.

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 schema has 0% coverage, so the description should add meaning. It does: it interprets 'sequence_id' as 'Sequence number' and 'executor_id' as 'Target executor number', and provides an example (1 and 6). This adds basic semantics beyond the schema titles and types, but lacks format or constraints (e.g., ranges, required permissions).

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: 'Assign a sequence to an executor'. This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like 'execute_sequence' (which runs a sequence) or 'release_executor' (which removes an assignment). The purpose is immediately clear and unambiguous.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It includes an example but does not explain the context or prerequisites (e.g., when to assign vs execute vs control). Without such guidance, an AI agent may struggle to select this tool appropriately among the many related sibling tools.

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