assign_objects_to_label

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering mutation and side effects. The description adds the confirmation requirement but does not elaborate on permissions, error states, or operation details.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a purpose: usage context, confirmation guideline, and exclusion of sibling tools. Front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words.

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?

Describes operation and provides usage guidance, but lacks information about return values, success/error responses, or behavior of simultaneous add and remove. Given no output schema, the agent may need more context on expected outcomes.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond stating 'assign or unassign cloud resources' – no extra detail on add/remove arrays or object types.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'assign or unassign cloud resources to a label'. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools create_label and get_label_assignments, leaving no ambiguity about scope.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (user wants assign/unassign) and when not to (creating labels or viewing assignments), naming alternative tools. Also advises to ask user confirmation before executing.

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