sigma_reassign_workbook_ownership

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

Beyond the sparse annotations, the description discloses the step-by-step process: resolving by email, finding all workbooks owned, PATCHing each, and the dry_run behavior that reports changes without applying them. This gives clear side-effect and safety 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 two sentences: the first is a clear one-line purpose, the second explains the process and dry-run semantics. No filler or redundancy; every sentence adds value.

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 description covers the operation, resolution mechanism, and dry-run behavior, which is sufficient for a mutation tool with an output schema. It omits edge-case details like missing members, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that old_owner_email and new_owner_email are used to resolve members, and dry_run (default true) controls whether changes are made. This adds meaning to all three parameters, though it doesn't cover error cases.

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 'Transfer all workbooks from one member to another' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining the reassignment mechanism, making it unique among the listed 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?

The description implies the tool is used when you need to transfer all workbooks from one member to another, and the dry_run default offers a safe usage pattern. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternatives like sigma_copy_workbook_to_member.

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