vikunja_task_assignees

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only implies mutation for assign/unassign and query for list, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether duplicate assignments are ignored, or permissions required).

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 very concise (one sentence) and front-loads the purpose. However, it could include brief parameter explanations without becoming overly verbose.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the tool description is incomplete. It does not mention return values for list-assignees, error conditions, or prerequisite states (e.g., task existence).

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage), and the description does not explain parameters. 'id' could be task ID but is unspecified; 'assignees' is an array of numbers but not identified as user IDs. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema structure.

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 tool's purpose: 'Manage task assignments' and lists three specific operations (assign, unassign, list assignees). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vikunja_task_crud or vikunja_labels, which handle different aspects of tasks.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no differentiation between operations (e.g., when to assign vs unassign) and no mention of prerequisites or best practices.

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