sigma_get_user_attribute_tenants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not repeat safety. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, ordering, or required permissions, which would be more valuable given the sparse information.

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, focused sentence conveying the essential action and resource without any fluff. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, earning its place.

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 read operation with an output schema, the description covers the core purpose. Minor gaps include not explaining what a 'tenant assignment' is or how attribute_id is used, but these are largely recoverable from the tool name and parameter name, making it sufficiently complete.

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 input schema has one parameter (attribute_id) with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention the parameter or how it relates to the tool's purpose, forcing the agent to rely entirely on the parameter name for meaning. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource ('all tenant assignments for a user attribute'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that set or update user attribute assignments. The scope ('all') is also clearly stated.

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 states what the tool does but provides no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance. It implies usage for retrieving tenant assignments but does not name any alternative tools or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and siblings.

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