batch_update_assignments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the operation's scope (multiple assignments), the unsupported field type (date fields), and the uniform application semantics. However, it does not mention error handling, partial failure behavior, or permissions, preventing a higher score.

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, front-loaded with the primary function, followed by the critical caveat about date fields and the uniform application model. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (nested updates object, batch operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it updates, its limitation, and how it applies updates. It does not specify return values or error semantics, but the core behavioral contract is clearly communicated.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds important context beyond the schema: that date fields are not supported within updates and that the same update is applied to every assignment ID, enhancing understanding of the updates and assignment_ids parameters.

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 begins with 'Update fields across multiple assignments at once,' clearly stating the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from singular update tools and explicitly excludes date fields, pointing to batch_update_dates as a sibling for that use case.

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?

It explicitly names batch_update_dates as the alternative for date changes and clarifies that the operation applies the same update to each assignment ID, signaling when to use this tool versus update_assignment or batch_update_dates.

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