Assign Website to Client

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with a mutation that is not destructive. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether the assignment replaces an existing one or what side effects occur.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded and clear. While minimally informative, it avoids unnecessary words and earns its place.

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?

Simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema. The description is minimal but sufficient for a basic assignment operation. Missing info on idempotency or error states, but within acceptable bounds for a straightforward action.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions 'Website ID' and 'Client ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond these labels. According to guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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 ('assign') and the resources ('website to a client'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that create or update websites and clients. However, it does not specify the nature of the assignment (e.g., ownership or linking), slightly reducing precision.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_website or create_client. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., website and client must exist) or conditions for assignment (e.g., preventing duplicates).

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