assign_lead

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so safety and repeatability are covered structurally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that — it never says whether an existing assignment is overwritten, whether notifications are sent, or what happens if the salesperson is invalid.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action first and the workflow hint second. No filler and nothing redundant with the schema.

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 two-required-parameter mutation with an idempotency annotation and no output schema, the essentials are covered. Missing: what the tool returns, how it behaves on an already-assigned lead, and any indication of error conditions.

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 coverage is 50%: lead_id is documented, salesperson_id is bare. The description implies salesperson_id should be sourced from recommend_salesperson, which is a genuinely useful origin hint, but adds no format or validity detail beyond the 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Assign a lead to a salesperson') that an agent can distinguish from siblings like recommend_salesperson (suggestion) and create_lead (creation). The parenthetical routing makes the boundary explicit.

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 names the prerequisite step ('use recommend_salesperson first'), which is real sequencing guidance against an alternative. It stops there: no when-not-to-use, no note about reassigning an already-assigned lead, and no permission prerequisites.

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