add_pr_reviewer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the mutation ('adds a reviewer') but lacks details on side effects, permissions required, or what happens on duplicate reviewer additions.

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 extremely concise: a one-line purpose followed by a clear list of arguments. Every element is meaningful, with 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?

While parameter descriptions are provided, the tool is a mutation with no annotations, and the description omits usage guidelines and behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, side effects). The presence of an output schema (not shown) reduces the need to explain return values, but overall the description is minimally adequate.

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% description coverage, so the description compensates well by explaining each parameter's meaning and expected format (e.g., 'Azure DevOps identity GUID', 'full PR URL or numeric PR ID'). This adds significant value over the raw schema.

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 ('add a reviewer') and the target resource ('to a PR'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'remove_pr_reviewer' and 'list_pr_reviewers'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to add vs. remove a reviewer) or any prerequisite conditions (e.g., PR must exist, user must have permissions).

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